Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE269FA3A7 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:51:02 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09099-01 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:50:58 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: delayed 00:30:28.288476 by SQLgrey- Received: from svr4.postgresql.org (svr4.postgresql.org [66.98.251.159]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F679FB22B for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:50:57 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.3 Received: from gamma.datatechlabs.com (unknown [83.223.156.5]) by svr4.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FA555AF97C for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:20:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.1.1.205] (unknown [83.223.156.4]) by gamma.datatechlabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CACD1CC43; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:07:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <453930DA.3070809@datatechlabs.com> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 23:26:02 +0300 From: alvis User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060921) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Suffolk Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: New hardware thoughts References: <0D8823B6-2A2D-40BA-B207-9DA0D50EDFB6@vanilla.net> <463B9F43-74FC-4DFE-ABC4-357228901174@fastcrypt.com> <5CBF0F4C-1EBE-480C-AD94-9E65A5A9BC8E@vanilla.net> In-Reply-To: <5CBF0F4C-1EBE-480C-AD94-9E65A5A9BC8E@vanilla.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.837 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, SPF_FAIL X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200610/438 X-Sequence-Number: 21567 Hi Ben , >> You mentioned a "Perc" controller, so I'll assume this is a Dell. >> >> My advice is to find another supplier. check the archives for Dell. >> >> Basically you have no idea what the Perc controller is since it is >> whatever Dell decides to ship that day. >> >> In general though you are going down the right path here. Disks >> first, memory second, cpu third >> >> Dave > > Yes I am looking at either the 2950 or the 6850. I think the only > think that the 6850 really offers me over the 2950 is more > expandability in the spare processor, and additional memory I see (in first mail) you plan to use bsd 6.1 on dell2950. --- flame on Off topic for postgresql performance , but i'd like to warn you neither perc5i crap nor network adapter got proper support for bsd 6.1 stable ( dell2950 box ) dmesg -a | grep bce bce0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 inet6 fe80::213:72ff:fe61:2ef6%bce1 prefixlen 64 tentative scopeid 0x2 bce0: link state changed to UP bce0: /usr/src/sys/dev/bce/if_bce.c(5032): Watchdog timeout occurred, resetting! bce0: link state changed to DOWN bce0: link state changed to UP uname -a FreeBSD xxx 6.1-STABLE FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE #0: xxx:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/customkenelcompiled-30-Aug-2006 i386 Problem with (latest?) raid perc is that only one logical volume is supported. You may find some bits of info on freebsd mailing lists. At least for n/w card problem i see no solution until now. 3 month old history: due to buggy firmware on maxtor disks sold by dell 2 servers from our server farm having raid5 crashed and data on raid array was lost. We were lucky to have proper replication solution. If you decide to choose 2950, you have to use linux instead of bsd 6.1 . Also buy 2 boxes instead of 1 and set up slony replication for redundancy. go dell , go to hell. --- flame off good luck! regards, alvis