Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA349FBAFE for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:19:58 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 85989-07 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:19:54 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.174]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F275E9FBAE9 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:19:53 -0400 (AST) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id k3so103893ugf for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:19:52 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=tZ+oqxBCKIG/zbsrY2cxgAM3jf4vfEEAzdSpO6dtH78QW4lPmZqpHnc/Eah7fiyA0KeFc6Dp8SHUAoiRkYvf3QFaHJTQlNDlJqGpHKVvQjJF+/TDAqVqwK6NRuM/5Rw0XtSFQCIb4fozMUUpNq8WN6r7eTRpdEW662IiPrSwX3w= Received: by 10.78.178.5 with SMTP id a5mr205015huf.1171444792164; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:19:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.100.9 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:19:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:19:52 +0100 From: "Claus Guttesen" To: "Kenji Morishige" Subject: Re: quad or dual core Intel CPUs Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <20070213194610.GA10789@juniper.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070213194610.GA10789@juniper.net> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=BAYES_50, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200702/147 X-Sequence-Number: 23201 > I am about to pull the trigger on a new machine after analyzing some > discussions I posted here last year. I've been trying to spec out a reliable > and powerfull enough machine where I won't have to replace it for some time. > Currently I've been using a dual Xeon 3.06ghz with 4GB of ram and utilizing a > RAID 1+0 configuration over a total 6 SCSI disks asside from the OS partition. > We have about 10GB of data and will probably scale at about 1GB per month. We > currently average about 200 queries per second and the 15 minute load average > is about .30. I am running FreeBSD 6.1. > > At the end of last year, I specced out a new machine to replace this box. At > that time, the quad core 2.66ghz were not available from my vendor and I was > not planning to go that route. Now that they are available, I am considering > the option. The main question here is whether FreeBSD 6.X and PostgreSQL 8.1 > would be able to take advantage of the quad core and perform better than the > 3.0Ghz dual core. The reason I ask is due to some conflicting benchmarking > results I see posted on the spec.org website. > > Here is the full specification of the new box I hope to build and run FreeBSD > 6.X and PostgreSQL on: > > - SuperMicro Dual Xeon X7DBE+ motherboard > + 2 x Quad Core X5355 2.66Ghz > OR > + 2 x Dual Core 5160 3.0Ghz > > - 8 x 1GB PC2-4200 fully buffered DIMM > > - LSI MegaRAID SAS 8408E w/BBU 256MB > > - 16 x 73GB SAS disk > > So, question #1, to go dual core or quad core? Quad core in theory seems to > scale the machine's processing potential by almost a factor of two. We recently migrated from a four way opteron @ 2 GHz with 8 GB to a four way woodcrest @ 3 GHz (HP DL380 G5) with 16 GB ram. I also upgraded FreeBSD from 6.0 to 6.2 and did a minor upgrade of postgresql from 7.4.9 to 7.4.12. The change was tremendous, the first few hours of after it went into production I had to doublecheck that our website worked, since the load was way below 1 whereas the load had been almost 100 during peak. I don't have any financial ties to HP but building a server from scratch may not be worth it, rather than spending time assemling all the different parts yourself I would suggest you get a server from one vendor who build a server according to your specs. The DL380 (also) has a 256 MB bbc controller, the nic works flawlessly with FreeBSD 6.2, all parts are well integrated, the frontbay can accomodate 8 146 GB SAS drives. This server is wellsuited as a postgresql-server. Approx. 200 reqest a sec. should be a problem unless the queries are heavy. regards Claus