On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 10:21 -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Scott Carey <scott@richrelevance.com> wrote:
> Lucky you, having needs that are fulfilled by sequential reads. :)
>
> I wonder how many hard drives it would take to be CPU bound on random
> access patterns? About 40 to 60? And probably 15k / SAS drives to
> boot. Cause that's what we're looking at in the next few years where
> I work.
I was able to achieve only 10-20% IO/Wait even after beating the heck
out of the machine with 50 spindles (of course it does have 16 CPUs):
http://www.commandprompt.com/blogs/joshua_drake/2008/04/is_that_performance_i_smell_ext2_vs_ext3_on_50_spindles_testing_for_postgresql/
>
--
PostgreSQL
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
