Re: Hardware suggestions
| От | Scott Marlowe |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Hardware suggestions |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4679A822.9030104@g2switchworks.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Hardware suggestions (christian.braun@tudor.lu) |
| Список | pgsql-performance |
christian.braun@tudor.lu wrote: > Hi list members, > > I have a question regarding hardware issues for a SDI (Spatial data > infrastructure). It will consist of PostgreSQL with PostGIS and a UMN > Mapserver/pmapper set up. > At our institute we are currently establishing a small GIS working > group. The data storage for vector data should be the central PostGIS > system. Raster data will be held in file system. > Mostly the users are accessing the data base in read only mode. From > the client side there is not much write access this only will be done > by the admin of the system to load new datasets. A prototype is > currently running on an old desktop pc with ubuntu dapper - not very > powerfull, of course! > We have about 10000 € to spend for a new server including the storage. > Do you have any recommendations for us? > I have read a lot of introductions to tune up PostgreSQL systems. > Since I don't have the possibility to tune up the soft parameters like > cache, mem sizes etc., I wondered about the hardware. Most things were > about the I/O of harddisks, RAM and file system. Is the filesystem > that relevant? Because wo want to stay at Ubuntu because of the > software support, espacially for the GIS-Systems. I think we need at > least about 300-500Gb for storage and the server you get for this > price are about two dualcore 2.0 - 2.8 GHz Opterons. > Do you have any suggestions for the hardware of a spatial data base in > that pricing category? Pay as much attention to your disk subsystem as to your CPU / memory setup. Look at RAID-5 or RAID-10 depending on which is faster for your setup. While RAID-10 is faster for a system seeing plenty of updates, and a bit more resiliant to drive failure, RAID-5 can give you a lot of storage and very good read performance, so it works well for reporting / warehousing setups. It might well be that a large RAID-10 with software RAID is a good choice for what you're doing, since it gets good read performance and is pretty cheap to implement. If you're going to be doing updates a lot, then look at a battery backed caching controller. Memory is a big deal. As much as you can reasonably afford to throw at the system. The file system can make a small to moderate impact on performance. Some loads are favored by JFS, others by XFS, and still others by ext2 for the data portion (only the pg_xlog needs to be on ext3 meta journaling only)
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: