On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 07:35:35AM +0100, Cosimo Streppone wrote: > >You might look at Opteron's, which theoretically have a higher data > >bandwidth. If you're doing anything data intensive, like a sort in > >memory, this could make a difference. > > Would Opteron systems need 64-bit postgresql (and os, gcc, ...) > build to have that advantage? Well, that would give you the most benefit, but the memory bandwidth is still greater than on a Xeon. There's really no issue with 64 bit if you're using open source software; it all compiles for 64 bits and you're good to go. http://stats.distributed.net runs on a dual opteron box running FreeBSD and I've had no issues.
> >RAID10 will be faster than RAID1. > > Sorry Jim, by RAID10 you mean several raid1 arrays mounted on > different linux partitions? Or several raid1 arrays that > build up a raid0 array? In the latter case, who decides which > data goes in which raid1 array? Raid Adapter? You should take a look around online for a description of raid types. There's technically RAID0+1 and RAID1+0; one is a stripe of mirrored drives (a RAID 0 built out of RAID 1s), the other is a mirror of two RAID 0s. The former is much better; if you're lucky you can lose half your drives without any data loss (if each dead drive is part of a different mirror). Recovery is also faster. You'll almost certainly be much happier with hardware raid instead of software raid. stats.distributed.net runs a 3ware controller and SATA drives. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?" ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
