X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BA8E9DC85A for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:53:36 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05487-03 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:53:36 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.69]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1C919DC818 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:53:33 -0400 (AST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=UwIbMRR7LAJ1m1pLXM11shdTyntL0KZgjtMXVybI+HJRQtO+ANoHzpKUXr04OMp3; h=Received:Message-Id:X-Mailer:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Mime-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [71.243.43.186] (helo=ron-6d52adff2a6.earthlink.net) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1F9SiU-0005cc-Ga; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:53:34 -0500 Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20060215142631.03bbaf90@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:53:28 -0500 To: "Jeremy Haile" ,pgsql-performance@postgresql.org From: Ron Subject: Re: Reliability recommendations In-Reply-To: <1140020490.9369.254450363@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20060215090446.2F3AC1B819F@mx1.hub.org> <1140018387.43f34cd36a076@imp2-g19.free.fr> <1140018967.43f34f1761803@imp2-g19.free.fr> <1140020490.9369.254450363@webmail.messagingengine.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-ELNK-Trace: acd68a6551193be5d780f4a490ca69563f9fea00a6dd62bc20c450af6685939055117bf3311ace1a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 71.243.43.186 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.479 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.479] X-Spam-Score: 0.479 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200602/211 X-Sequence-Number: 17197 At 11:21 AM 2/15/2006, Jeremy Haile wrote: >We are a small company looking to put together the most cost effective >solution for our production database environment. Currently in >production Postgres 8.1 is running on this machine: > >Dell 2850 >2 x 3.0 Ghz Xeon 800Mhz FSB 2MB Cache >4 GB DDR2 400 Mhz >2 x 73 GB 10K SCSI RAID 1 (for xlog and OS) >4 x 146 GB 10K SCSI RAID 10 (for postgres data) >Perc4ei controller > >The above is a standard Dell box with nothing added or modified beyond >the options available directly through Dell. We had a bad processor last >week that effectively put us down for an entire weekend. Though it was >the web server that failed, the experience has caused us to step back >and spend time coming up with a more reliable/fail-safe solution that >can reduce downtime. > >Our load won't be substantial so extreme performance and load balancing >are not huge concerns. We are looking for good performance, at a good >price, configured in the most redundant, high availability manner >possible. Availability is the biggest priority. > >I sent our scenario to our sales team at Dell and they came back with >all manner of SAN, DAS, and configuration costing as much as $50k. > >We have the budget to purchase 2-3 additional machines along the lines >of the one listed above. As a startup with a limited budget, what would >this list suggest as options for clustering/replication or setting our >database up well in general? 1= Tell Dell "Thanks but no thanks." and do not buy any more equipment from them. Their value per $$ is less than other options available to you. 2= The current best bang for the buck HW (and in many cases, best performing as well) for pg: a= AMD K8 and K9 (dual core) CPUs. Particularly the A64 X2 3800+ when getting the most for your $$ matters a lot pg gets a nice performance boost from running in 64b. b= Decent Kx server boards are available from Gigabyte, IWill, MSI, Supermicro, and Tyan to name a few. IWill has a 2P 16 DIMM slot board that is particularly nice for a server that needs lots of RAM. c= Don't bother with SCSI or FC HD's unless you are doing the most demanding kind of OLTP. SATA II HD's provide better value. d= HW RAID controllers are only worth it in certain scenarios. Using RAID 5 almost always means you should use a HW RAID controller. e= The only HW RAID controllers worth the $$ for you are 3ware Escalade 9550SX's and Areca ARC-11xx or ARC-12xx's. *For the vast majority of throughput situations, the ARC-1xxx's with >= 1GB of battery backed WB cache are the best value* f= 1GB RAM sticks are cheap enough and provide enough value that you should max out any system you get with them. g= for +high+ speed fail over, Chelsio and others are now making PCI-X and PCI-E 10GbE NICs at reasonable prices. The above should serve as a good "pick list" for the components of any servers you need. 3= The most economically sound HW and SW architecture that best suits your performance and reliability needs is context dependent to your specific circumstances. Where are you located? Ron