From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
To: christian.braun@tudor.lu
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hardware suggestions
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:20:18 -0500
Message-ID: <4679A822.9030104@g2switchworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF414BF8DA.327C4584-ONC12572FF.00398A72-C12572FF.00398A77@tudor.lu>
References: <OF414BF8DA.327C4584-ONC12572FF.00398A72-C12572FF.00398A77@tudor.lu>
christian.braun@tudor.lu wrote:
> Hi list members,
>
> I have a question regarding hardware issues for a SDI (Spatial data
> infrastructure). It will consist of PostgreSQL with PostGIS and a UMN
> Mapserver/pmapper set up.
> At our institute we are currently establishing a small GIS working
> group. The data storage for vector data should be the central PostGIS
> system. Raster data will be held in file system.
> Mostly the users are accessing the data base in read only mode. From
> the client side there is not much write access this only will be done
> by the admin of the system to load new datasets. A prototype is
> currently running on an old desktop pc with ubuntu dapper - not very
> powerfull, of course!
> We have about 10000 € to spend for a new server including the storage.
> Do you have any recommendations for us?
> I have read a lot of introductions to tune up PostgreSQL systems.
> Since I don't have the possibility to tune up the soft parameters like
> cache, mem sizes etc., I wondered about the hardware. Most things were
> about the I/O of harddisks, RAM and file system. Is the filesystem
> that relevant? Because wo want to stay at Ubuntu because of the
> software support, espacially for the GIS-Systems. I think we need at
> least about 300-500Gb for storage and the server you get for this
> price are about two dualcore 2.0 - 2.8 GHz Opterons.
> Do you have any suggestions for the hardware of a spatial data base in
> that pricing category?
Pay as much attention to your disk subsystem as to your CPU / memory
setup. Look at RAID-5 or RAID-10 depending on which is faster for your
setup. While RAID-10 is faster for a system seeing plenty of updates,
and a bit more resiliant to drive failure, RAID-5 can give you a lot of
storage and very good read performance, so it works well for reporting /
warehousing setups.
It might well be that a large RAID-10 with software RAID is a good
choice for what you're doing, since it gets good read performance and is
pretty cheap to implement. If you're going to be doing updates a lot,
then look at a battery backed caching controller.
Memory is a big deal. As much as you can reasonably afford to throw at
the system.
The file system can make a small to moderate impact on performance. Some
loads are favored by JFS, others by XFS, and still others by ext2 for
the data portion (only the pg_xlog needs to be on ext3 meta journaling only)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: smarlowe@g2switchworks.com, christian.braun@tudor.lu
Subject: Re: Hardware suggestions
In-Reply-To: <4679A822.9030104@g2switchworks.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox