Re: [PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-24 Thread Lionel
"Scott Marlowe" wrote: > I second this. Partitioning in time in past reporting databases > resulted in huge performance improvements for select queries. Most statements will load data from a single year, but multiple monthes. I have a integer field containing the year and will use it for partit

Re: [PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-24 Thread Lutz Steinborn
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 23:41:49 -0600 "Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Scott Carey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you are doing batch inserts of data, and want to have reporting queries > > concurrently running, make sure you have the pg_xlogs on a diff

Re: [PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-23 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Scott Carey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you are doing batch inserts of data, and want to have reporting queries > concurrently running, make sure you have the pg_xlogs on a different disk > than the data/indexes. 2 drives RAID 1 for OS + xlogs works great (and

Re: [PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-23 Thread Scott Carey
If you are doing batch inserts of data, and want to have reporting queries concurrently running, make sure you have the pg_xlogs on a different disk than the data/indexes. 2 drives RAID 1 for OS + xlogs works great (and these can be SAS if you choose, have a separate partition -- ext2 if it is li

Re: [PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-23 Thread Ivan Voras
Lionel wrote: > Hello, > > I have to choose a dedicated server to host a big 8.3 database. > The global size of the database (indexes included) will grow by 40 Go every > year (40 millions of lines/year) > Real data (indexes excluded) will be around 5-7 Go/year. > I need to store 4 years of activ

Re: [PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-23 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Any other better option that I could ask for ? > > Yes, more drives. 4 drives in a RAID10 is a good start. If you could > get 8 or 12 in one that's even better. > Note that for transactional databases SAS drives are

Re: [PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-23 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Lionel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I have to choose a dedicated server to host a big 8.3 database. > The global size of the database (indexes included) will grow by 40 Go every > year (40 millions of lines/year) > Real data (indexes excluded) will be aro

[PERFORM] Hardware HD choice...

2008-10-23 Thread Lionel
Hello, I have to choose a dedicated server to host a big 8.3 database. The global size of the database (indexes included) will grow by 40 Go every year (40 millions of lines/year) Real data (indexes excluded) will be around 5-7 Go/year. I need to store 4 years of activity. Very few simultaneous u