From: Claus Guttesen <kometen@gmail.com>
To: Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org>
Cc: Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (5TB)
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 22:50:19 +0100
Message-ID: <b41c75520511161350u3ed6f4b1x@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D1ABFA1F-FEB0-4E01-BC2E-482535A5DB28@khera.org>
References: <1B80C974ABFB23429A403B6667FE84C71066E8@seiumain.SEIU.local>
<b41c75520511150028o553e6bb5j@mail.gmail.com>
<D1ABFA1F-FEB0-4E01-BC2E-482535A5DB28@khera.org>
> at 5TB data, i'd vote that the application is disk I/O bound, and the
> difference in CPU speed at the level of dual opteron vs. dual-core
> opteron is not gonna be noticed.
>
> to maximize disk, try getting a dedicated high-end disk system like
> nstor or netapp file servers hooked up to fiber channel, then use a
> good high-end fiber channel controller like one from LSI.
>
> and go with FreeBSD amd64 port. It is *way* fast, especially the
> FreeBSD 6.0 disk system.
I'm (also) FreeBSD-biased but I'm not shure whether the 5 TB fs will
work so well if tools like fsck are needed. Gvinum could be one option
but I don't have any experience in that area.
regards
Claus
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: kometen@gmail.com, vivek@khera.org
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (5TB)
In-Reply-To: <b41c75520511161350u3ed6f4b1x@mail.gmail.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