Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WhdDS-00039D-TF for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 11:07:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WhdDS-0000CP-8p for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 11:07:18 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WhdDQ-0000CI-Ud for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 11:07:17 +0000 Received: from harad.mathom.us ([54.218.24.45]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WhdDN-0007y9-Un for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 11:07:16 +0000 Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us (osgiliath.mathom.us [IPv6:2001:4830:1614:2341::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by harad.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F660401C3 for ; Tue, 6 May 2014 11:07:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mathom.us; s=mail; t=1399374430; bh=6T3VQmycD4ggonn+AbztBzqHSqok7fXaz2MjZS2KaF8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=llJZ6huI0TvVupFw5LHe7HhHjy1R6jSRudfvWR7eHLMpYE7aSN+SBb2rxlH0q9WPd zbrRdXH6vVWL6jkgX0BDNE4JrAPylGoUPdYwkWNf/fyExNbjl8hCI3a/qP8mq/nHJn 9F0UCqxZb6/FHVvHtmcbKaJ5lukO5qbraB61LPEo= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7175E6E630 for ; Tue, 6 May 2014 07:07:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (osgiliath.mathom.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id YbtjPJOYZhGu for ; Tue, 6 May 2014 07:07:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4A5786E777; Tue, 6 May 2014 07:07:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 07:07:14 -0400 From: Michael Stone To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Specifications for a new server Message-ID: <20140506110714.GA9155@mathom.us> Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 02D5 315F F11F 1861 860E 1E02 F61A ACDC FA11 FFDE User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Pg-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 11:13:42AM +0200, Johann Spies wrote: >Analysis or the SAR-logs showed that there were too much iowait in the CPU's on >the old system which has a lower spec CPU than the ones considered for the new >system. iowait means the cpu is doing nothing but waiting for data from the disk. buying faster cpus means that they will be able to spend more time waiting for data from the disk. you'd probably get much better bang for the buck upgrading the storage subsystem than throwing more money at cpus. >We are looking possibly the following hardware: > >CPU: 2 x  Ivy Bridge 8C E5-2667V2 3.3G 25M 8GT/s QPI - 16 cores >RAM: 24 x 32GB DDR3-1866 2Rx4 LP ECC REG RoHS  - 768Gb > >with enough disk space - about 4.8 Tb on RAID 10. >My question is about the possible advantage and usage of SSD disks in the new >server.  >At the moment I am considering using 2 x 200GB SSD' s for a separate >partion for temporary files and 2 x 100GB for the operating system. If you're talking about SSDs for the OS, that's a complete waste; there is essentially no I/O relating to the OS once you've booted. >So my questions: > >1. Will the SSD's in this case be worth the cost? >2.  What will the best way to utilize them in the system? The best way to utilize them would probably be to spend less on the CPU and RAM and more on the storage, and use SSD either for all of the storage or for specific items that have a high level of I/O (such as the indexes). Can't be more specific than that without a lot more information about the database, how it is utilized, and what's actually slow. Mike Stone -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance