On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:00:36 -0800, Max <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Our postgresql database is getting too big to be handled by one server. We
> need the database to be in RAM and cannot afford swapping. At the moment,
> we're using only 3GB or RAM, however our business growth is going
Max wrote:
> Actually winXP and win server 2003 do support AMD64, it's intel 64
> that's not supported yet.
To be accurate, Windows AMD64 support is still in beta. There has been
a IA64 production release for quite some time, though Microsoft recently
announced that they were discontinuing it.
"Max" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's a question for the developers: what's the memory consumption
> difference when you move a 3GB database from a 32 bit machine to a 64 ?
Not a lot.
> Isn't the whole data taking up more RAM because pointers are now 64 bits
> instead of 32 ?
There are no p
Max wrote:
And you absolutely want a 64-bit OS with that much memory. Even on our
development server with just 3GB of RAM, we see quite big jumps in
performance after moving from 32-bit Linux to 64-bit Linux. I'd hate to
think about 64GB of RAM being swapped in and out using PAE.
What's PAE ?
32-b
postgresql-8.0.0beta4 $ time make -j 5
... lots of output ...
real0m41.274s
user1m36.315s
sys 0m15.451s
Yikes.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of PFC
> Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 1:25 PM
> To: Max; PgSql General
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
>
>
>
> > I have never heard o
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 21:18:38 +0100, PFC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I wonder how long your killer machine will take to compile the whole
> OS.
> And Postgres too... could you post that ?
Well, I can't rebuild the whole OS (I'm using the box ... ) but:
postgresql-8.0.0beta4 $ ti
I have never heard of Propolice SSP. What is it ? Any relation to the
honey
'Propolys'. just kidding.
Max
The name says little although I like it.
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/
I was out of date -- Propolice has been renamed PaX.
The hardened project has many parts, you should r
> And you absolutely want a 64-bit OS with that much memory. Even on our
> development server with just 3GB of RAM, we see quite big jumps in
> performance after moving from 32-bit Linux to 64-bit Linux. I'd hate to
> think about 64GB of RAM being swapped in and out using PAE.
>
What's PAE ?
Here
>
> I won't say anything on linux vs windows performance
> (although I sure do
> have an opinion), but simply keep in mind that postgres on window
> is young
> and postgres on linux is vary mature ; therefore one is likely to have a
> lot more performance refinements than the other.
This is
Thanks for reminding me that 64bit translates to: recompile everything
you
need!
I think this is exactly the choice of configuration we are going to make.
Someone just reminded me that windows and linux come down to the same
performance, but that the real overhead is on maintenance. It's true th
Max wrote:
That would be quite an investment. Interesting. I wonder if we should put
windows or linux on it, since postgresql 8.0 works on windows.
What OS are you running on your quad opteron ?
Well here's one thing that you can bank on. You can get 64-bit Linux now
while 64-bit Windows is still
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mike Rylander
> Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 11:01 AM
> To: Max
> Cc: PgSql General
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
>
>
> On Sat, 29 Jan 20
neral
> > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:17:29 -0800, Max <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With a Quad Opteron (4 memory slots per CPU), you could put
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mike Rylander
> > Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 4:02 AM
> > To: Max; PgSql General
> > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
> >
&g
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dann Corbit
> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 12:01 PM
> To: William Yu; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
>
>
> Suppose th
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of William Yu
> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 11:36 AM
> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
>
>
> Without memory, the pr
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mike Rylander
> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 4:02 AM
> To: Max; PgSql General
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
>
>
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:17:29 -
] Splitting queries across servers
Without memory, the prices are roughly:
4x846 = $5500
4x848 = $6500
4x850 = $8000
Memory costs would be:
16GB (1GB DIMMs) = $3000
32GB (2GB DIMMs) = $7500
64GB (4GB DIMMs) = $24000
128GB (8GB DIMMs) = $6
The prices on the 4GB & 8GB DIMMs are bleeding edg
Without memory, the prices are roughly:
4x846 = $5500
4x848 = $6500
4x850 = $8000
Memory costs would be:
16GB (1GB DIMMs) = $3000
32GB (2GB DIMMs) = $7500
64GB (4GB DIMMs) = $24000
128GB (8GB DIMMs) = $6
The prices on the 4GB & 8GB DIMMs are bleeding edge of course. I see a
wide range of for t
With a Quad Opteron (4 memory slots per CPU), you could put 64GB of RAM
onto a single machine using 4GB DIMMs in every slot.
The other option is to explore static memory storage. It's probably too
expensive to put your entire DB onto such a device but moving just the
WAL there would give you a
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:17:29 -0800, Max <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > With a Quad Opteron (4 memory slots per CPU), you could put 64GB of RAM
> > onto a single machine using 4GB DIMMs in every slot.
>
> We were talking about a similar solution today, but not quite as good as
> this. You r
>
>
> With a Quad Opteron (4 memory slots per CPU), you could put 64GB of RAM
> onto a single machine using 4GB DIMMs in every slot.
We were talking about a similar solution today, but not quite as good as
this. You really got me thinking now. 64Gb.. hm that would solve many
issues. what do you th
ginal Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Yu
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 12:41 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
With a Quad Opteron (4 memory slots per CPU), you could put 64GB of RAM
o
bject: Re: [GENERAL] Splitting queries across servers
With a Quad Opteron (4 memory slots per CPU), you could put 64GB of RAM
onto a single machine using 4GB DIMMs in every slot.
The other option is to explore static memory storage. It's probably too
expensive to put your entire DB onto suc
>
> We configured a slony1 cluster with a master and slave (both 7.4.6), and
> used the slave to serve read-only queries thereby offloading some of the
> work from the master database.
>
> This worked well for us.
>
> You could also take a look at pg_pool to distribute your load - but I
> haven't
>
> Wow. Your needs really *are* demanding. You might need to look into a
> high-end server to meet those kinds of needs - Sun has some *very*
> expensive hardware that can handle over 1/2TB of RAM, for example, and
> Cray makes supercomputers (even more *very* expensive) which can handle
> somew
We configured a slony1 cluster with a master and slave (both 7.4.6), and
used the slave to serve read-only queries thereby offloading some of the
work from the master database.
This worked well for us.
You could also take a look at pg_pool to distribute your load - but I
haven't actually used i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wow. Your needs really *are* demanding. You might need to look into a
high-end server to meet those kinds of needs - Sun has some *very*
expensive hardware that can handle over 1/2TB of RAM, for example, and
Cray makes supercomputers (even more *ve
Hello,
Our postgresql database is getting too big to be handled by one server. We
need the database to be in RAM and cannot afford swapping. At the moment,
we're using only 3GB or RAM, however our business growth is going to drive
this number into the double digits zone, maybe triple digits.
What
30 matches
Mail list logo
