if in doubt, memory first -- although it depends your app and hits.
processor/disk: check your cpu use.
amy
>From: Michael <grim@argh.demon.co.uk>
>Reply-To: grim@argh.demon.co.uk
>To: pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] Hardware optimising
>Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 11:19:39 +0100
>
>Hi
>
>I am about to upgrade a server that is about to be running a large and busy
>postgresql database
>currently it has
>
>128 MB 100 MHz SDRAM
>AMD K6-2/300 CPU
>10 GB 7200RPM 9.0ms IBM IDE HDD
>
>It will, over the next few months, as money becomes available, be upgraded
>to:
>
>256 MB 100 MHz SDRAM
>Dual Athlon 500 CPUs
>10 GB UltraII Wide SCSI drive
>
>The database will contain several million records and needs to be able to
>do
>very fast selects from tables with a lot of rows, and do small updates and
>inserts onto these tables at a good speed also.
>
>Now, as the funds for this upgrade are trickling through slowly, I need to
>know
>where I would see the most performance increase initially. Which of the
>three
>peices would I be best to upgrade first to see the best performance
>increase. I
>am leaning towards the fast scsi, as there is a LOT of data transfer.
>
>Any insights from people that already run big databases, do we need memory,
>CPU
>or fast disc most?
>
>Thanx
> M Simms
>--
>#define z(x,y) for (x=0;x<y;x++){
>main(){long int i[3]={1214606444,1864390511,1919706122};int x,y;
> z(x,3)z(y,4)putchar((i[x]>>((3-y)<<3))&(255));
>}}}
>
>
>************
>
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com