Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 13:02, Steve Poe wrote:
I have a client who is running Postgresql 7.4.x series database
(required to use 7.4.x). They are planning an upgrade to a new server.
They are insistent on Dell.
Do they have a logical reason for this, or is it mostly hand-waving?
They probably do. They have probably standardized on Dell hardware. It
is technically a dumb reason, but from a business standpoint it makes sense.
My
experience has been hand waving. Last company I was at, the CIO bragged
about having saved a million a year on server by going with Dell. His
numbers were made up, and, in fact, we spent a large portion of each
week babysitting those god awful 2600 series machines with adaptec cards
and the serverworks chipset. And they were slow compared to anything
else with similar specs.
You can get extremely competitive quotes from IBM or HP as long as you
say, "You are competing against Dell".
Dells tend to perform poorly, period. They choose low end parts (the
2600's Serverworks chipset is widely regarded as one of the slowest
chipset for the P-IV there is.) and then mucking around with the BIOS of
the add in cards to make them somewhat stable with their dodgy hardware.
I can confirm this.
I am hoping the client is willing to wait for Dell to ship a AMD
Opeteron-based server.
Tell them to go with an HP DL 385. They will be much happier.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
