Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 909D69F9A14
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  9 Nov 2007 12:01:44 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 14797-03-5
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  9 Nov 2007 12:01:28 -0400 (AST)
Received: from smtp-vbr8.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr8.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.28])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 639749F95B0
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  9 Nov 2007 12:01:13 -0400 (AST)
Received: from easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl (easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl
	[80.126.125.147])
	by smtp-vbr8.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lA9G1A8Q046284;
	Fri, 9 Nov 2007 17:01:11 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from jurgen@easyflex.nl)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 464504608C8;
	Fri,  9 Nov 2007 17:01:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (pluto.easyflex.lan [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 22185-10; Fri, 9 Nov 2007 17:01:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.1.4.158] (unknown [10.1.4.158])
	by easyflexsoftware.xs4all.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1511C4608C5;
	Fri,  9 Nov 2007 17:01:08 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <47348444.6000700@easyflex.nl>
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 17:01:08 +0100
From: Jurgen Haan <jurgen@easyflex.nl>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tore Halset <halset@pvv.ntnu.no>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: dell versus hp
References: <82607932-FC46-4B73-BF78-2290EE55F7F5@pvv.ntnu.no>
In-Reply-To: <82607932-FC46-4B73-BF78-2290EE55F7F5@pvv.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200711/138
X-Sequence-Number: 27553

Apart from the disks, you might also investigate using Opterons instead
of Xeons. there appears to be some significant dent in performance
between Opteron and Xeon. Xeons appear to spend more time in passing
around ownership of memory cache lines in case of a spinlock.
It's not yet clear whether or not here has been worked around the issue.
You should at least investigate it a bit.

We're using a HP DL385 ourselves which performs quite well.

-R-

Tore Halset wrote:
> Hello.

> 1) Dell 2900 (5U)
> 8 * 146 GB SAS 15Krpm 3,5"
> 8GB ram
> Perc 5/i. battery backup. 256MB ram.
> 2 * 4 Xeon 2,66GHz
> 
> 2) Dell 2950 (2U)
> 8 * 146 GB SAS 10Krpm 2,5" (not really selectable, but I think the
> webshop is wrong..)
> 8GB ram
> Perc 5/i. battery backup. 256MB ram.
> 2 * 4 Xeon 2,66GHz
> 
> 3) HP ProLiant DL380 G5 (2U)
> 8 * 146 GB SAS 10Krpm 2,5"
> 8GB ram
> P400 raid controller. battery backup. 512MB ram.
> 2 * 2 Xeon 3GHz
>