On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 09:41:36AM -0500, Michael D. Sofka wrote: > >I suggest looking at your current bottleneck first. > >It's likely to be the most cost-efficient route out. > > I/O is our bottleneck. The machine is not CPU loaded. And, in fact, > our current performance is good. The machine upgrade is planned with a > service upgrade. Current hardware is old, and so getting more expensive > to support. We also anticipate service growth (read, more spam), and > so are planning accordingly. Which, as I mentioned, is why RAID5 is not a good solution if you're doing any writes at all. You're talking about a 16G database that you expect to grow to 64G. That would fit happily in a RAID1 (mirror) of two SCSI 72G drives. I haven't priced that kind of stuff out recently, but I believe you're looking at $300-$500. If that doesn't provide enough performance, go to a RAID10 and add more drives. If you're doing much writing at all, spring for a battery-backed controller so you can enable write caching. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
