Hardware - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Walter Vaughan
Subject Hardware
Date
Msg-id 45C8A5D9.5000206@steelerubber.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Hardware  (Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>)
Re: Hardware  (Guido Neitzer <lists@event-s.net>)
Re: Hardware  (Lars Heidieker <lars@heidieker.de>)
Re: Hardware  (Ben <bench@silentmedia.com>)
List pgsql-general
I need to purchase a new server to put posgresql on that will be acting as the
DBMS server for Apache ofBiz soon. While googling around for performance tweaks
I saw this at http://revsys.com/writings/postgresql-performance.html

<quote>
CPUs — The more CPUs the better, however if your database does not use many
complex functions your money is best spent on a better disk subsystem. Also,
avoid Intel Xeon processors with PostgreSQL as there is a problem with the
context switching in these processors that gives sub-par performance. Opterons
are generally accepted as being a superior CPU for PostgreSQL databases.
</quote>

Is this still true in regards to Xeon's? I was looking at a server with Quad
Core Xeon 2 5335 @ 2.0GHz.

And at http://www.powerpostgresql.com/PerfList

<quote>
focus on RAID 1 or 1+0 or 0+1 for any set of 2, 4 or 6 disks.
</quote>

Are RAID 1 or 1+0 or 0+1 equal in speed, performance, downtime in regards to
postgresql. Is it a coin toss?

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL on Solaris: Changing Compilers During Point Upgrade
Next
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres SQL Syntax