Message-ID: <437DD5A1.1090605@archonet.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:22:41 +0000
From: Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051013)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
Cc: Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com>,
	Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, Joshua Marsh <icub3d@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
References: <BFA2AFBA.13FC4%llonergan@greenplum.com>
	<0F3B99E2-4575-42B8-8AAC-3FE4B231348C@fastcrypt.com>
In-Reply-To: <0F3B99E2-4575-42B8-8AAC-3FE4B231348C@fastcrypt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave Cramer wrote:
> 
> On 18-Nov-05, at 1:07 AM, Luke Lonergan wrote:
> 
>> Postgres + Any x86 CPU from 2.4GHz up to Opteron 280 is CPU bound  after
>> 110MB/s of I/O.  This is true of Postgres 7.4, 8.0 and 8.1.
>>
>> A $1,000 system with one CPU and two SATA disks in a software RAID0  will
>> perform exactly the same as a $80,000 system with 8 dual core CPUs  
>> and the
>> world's best SCSI RAID hardware on a large database for decision  support
>> (what the poster asked about).
> 
> 
> Now there's an interesting line drawn in the sand. I presume you have  
> numbers to back this up ?
> 
> This should draw some interesting posts.

Well, I'm prepared to swap Luke *TWO* $1000 systems for one $80,000 
system if he's got one going :-)

--
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd