Message-ID: <472B2E99.7090605@easyflex.nl>
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:05:13 +0100
From: Jurgen Haan <jurgen@easyflex.nl>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ketema <ketema@gmail.com>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hardware for PostgreSQL
References: <1193849108.591961.103570@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <1193849108.591961.103570@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Ketema wrote:

> RAM?  The more the merrier right? Understanding shmmax and the pg
> config file parameters for shared mem has to be adjusted to use it.
> Disks?  standard Raid rules right?  1 for safety 5 for best mix of
> performance and safety?
> Any preference of SCSI over SATA? What about using a High speed (fibre
> channel) mass storage device?

You might also check out NETAPP NAS arrays.
Due to clever use of a big memory buffer and a custom filesystem on a
RAID-4 array it has performance comparable to a big RAM disk connected
through NFS.

Works quite well with OLTP (at least for us).

> 
> Who has built the biggest baddest Pg server out there and what do you
> use?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings