Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Greg Stark
Josh Berkus writes: > Last I checked, the v40z only takes 5 drives, unless you yank the cd-rom and > get an extra disk tray. That's the main defect of the model, the second > being its truly phenominal noise level. Other than that (and price) and > excellent Opteron machine. Incidentally,

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Joel Fradkin
There have been some discussions on this list and others in general about Dell's version of RAID cards, and server support, mainly linux support. I was pretty impressed with the Dell guy. He spent the day with me remotely and went through my system 6650 with powervault. Changed my drives from ext3

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Mike Rylander
On 4/20/05, Anjan Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In terms of vendor specific models - > > Does anyone have any good/bad experiences/recommendations for a 4-way > Opteron from Sun (v40z, 6 internal drives) or HP (DL585 5 internal > drives) models? We are going with the 90nm HPs for production.

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Rod Taylor
> The HPs are at root pretty good machines -- and take 6 drives, so I expect > you're mixed up there. However, they use HP's proprietary RAID controller > which is seriously defective. So you need to factor replacing the RAID > controller into the cost. Do you have any additional materials o

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Josh Berkus
Anjan, > Does anyone have any good/bad experiences/recommendations for a 4-way > Opteron from Sun (v40z, 6 internal drives) or HP (DL585 5 internal > drives) models? Last I checked, the v40z only takes 5 drives, unless you yank the cd-rom and get an extra disk tray. That's the main defect of t

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Anjan Dave
20, 2005 12:14 PM To: Bruce Momjian Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?) On Wednesday 20 April 2005 17:50, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Anjan Dave wrote: > > In terms of vendor specific models - > > > >

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Christian Sander Røsnes
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 17:50, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Anjan Dave wrote: > > In terms of vendor specific models - > > > > Does anyone have any good/bad experiences/recommendations for a 4-way > > Opteron from Sun (v40z, 6 internal drives) or HP (DL585 5 internal > > drives) models? > > > > This i

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Anjan Dave wrote: > In terms of vendor specific models - > > Does anyone have any good/bad experiences/recommendations for a 4-way > Opteron from Sun (v40z, 6 internal drives) or HP (DL585 5 internal > drives) models? > > This is in comparison with the new Dell 6850 (it has PCIexpress, faster > F

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Anjan Dave
ch up with AMD's total IO bandwidth, but much better than previous 6650s). Thanks, Anjan -Original Message- From: William Yu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 11:10 AM To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread Vivek Khera
On Apr 20, 2005, at 12:40 AM, Jeff Frost wrote: I've seen quite a few folks touting the Opteron as 2.5x faster with postgres than a Xeon box. What makes the Opteron so quick? Is it that Postgres really prefers to run in 64-bit mode? The I/O path on the opterons seems to be much faster, and hav

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-20 Thread William Yu
I posted this link a few months ago and there was some surprise over the difference in postgresql compared to other DBs. (Not much surprise in Opteron stomping on Xeon in pgsql as most people here have had that experience -- the surprise was in how much smaller the difference was in other DBs.)

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-19 Thread Jeff Frost
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: I don't know about 2.5x faster (perhaps on specific types of loads), but the reason Opterons rock for database applications is their insanely good memory bandwidth and latency that scales much better than the Xeon. Opterons also have a ccNUMA-esque I

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-19 Thread J. Andrew Rogers
I've seen quite a few folks touting the Opteron as 2.5x faster with postgres than a Xeon box. What makes the Opteron so quick? Is it that Postgres really prefers to run in 64-bit mode? I don't know about 2.5x faster (perhaps on specific types of loads), but the reason Opterons rock for datab

Re: [PERFORM] Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?)

2005-04-19 Thread Jeff Frost
RAID1 2 disks OS, pg_xlog RAID 1+0 4 disks pgdata Looks like the consensus is RAID 1 for OS, pg_xlog and RAID10 for pgdata. Now here's another performance related question: I've seen quite a few folks touting the Opteron as 2.5x faster with postgres than a Xeon box. What makes the Opteron so q