Re: Hardware estimation - Mailing list pgsql-general

----- Original Message -----
From: "scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>
To: "Vidal" <vzebulum@yahoo.com.br>
Cc: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Hardware estimation


> On 5 Nov 2002, Vidal wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am a first timer in this forum. We have  an application  using
> > Postgre Database with a considerable growth expected for the next
> > year. We are facing some dificulties to estimate the equipment we´ll
> > need  and I would like to exchange ideas about:
> >
> > - hardware estimation
> > - performance concerns
> >
> >  with anyone that faced Postgre applications with more than 150Gb.
> >
> > I am talking about a database that will achieve:
> >
> > - 200Gb total space
> > - 2 major space cosuming tables (400 million and 50 million tuples)
> > - major system process - batch process reading from and writing to
> > text files (telephony records) - aprox 2 million records processed
> > (read or written every day)
> >
> > Operating System : Linux
> >
> > Equipment we are planning:
> > - IBM xSeries 255 4 Intel Xeon 1.5GHz, MP, 512KB Cache, 2GB RAM,
> > External Storage System(IBM SSA)
>
> Are you going to be supporting a fair number of simo users, or is this
> gonna be mostly a single batch at a time operation?
>
> If you're mostly gonna be running single user batch files for all the
> heavy lifting, save the money you'd spend on a quad Xeon and spend it on
> more / bigger / faster drive arrays and faster individual CPUs, like a
> dual Athlon 2800.
>
> But maybe the multi-user part is still very important to your uses.  If
> so...
>
> If you are looking at a quad Xeon, then take a look at going all the way
> to 64 bit architecture (Ultra Sparc, HP, P6xx IBM, Itanium 2) where you
> can throw scads of memory at your problems and postgresql can access it.
>
> You might find a dual Ultra Sparc will outrun the quad xeon due to better
> memory access, larger caches (8Meg L2 cache), and being able to put
> ungodly amounts of memory into the machine.
>
> Some of the "low end" 64 bit machines are not any more expensive than a
> quad xeon can run.
>
> A quad 1GHz Power4 with 8 gig ram, dual 36 Gig drives and all the fixings
> goes for $44,000.  That's with 64 Meg L3 cache.
>
>
Mr Scott,


Thanks for the prompt response.

Our processes will be mostly batch ones. On line activity will be restricted
to a few users. And for some on-line process we will use consolidated data.
But all batch processes will have to use the tables with 50M  and 500M
records.

We will strongly consider your option for external storage. We would rather
relay on a Risc arquitecture due to the I/O effort of our batch processes.
Our IBM rep then raised a problem: there was no linux driver in
thePower3(P610) for the external storage solution we wanted. Then they
mentioned the possibility to use the quad Xeon solution. We will still push
them and HP for a Risc solution with external storafe. Your statement
enforce this choice. Thanks for that.

Do you think we should have problems with Postgre at that  database size
assuming we will take double care with tunning ? Do you know anyone with
similar volume ?

Thanks a lot

Best regards

Vidal Salem Zebulum


_______________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! GeoCities
Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas fáceis de usar, espaço de sobra e acessórios.
http://br.geocities.yahoo.com/