On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 2:14 PM, <david@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Francisco Reyes wrote: > >> Anyone has any experience doing analytics with postgres. In particular if >> 10K rpm drives are good enough vs using 15K rpm, over 24 drives. Price >> difference is $3,000. >> >> Rarely ever have more than 2 or 3 connections to the machine. >> >> So far from what I have seen throughput is more important than TPS for the >> queries we do. Usually we end up doing sequential scans to do >> summaries/aggregates. > > With sequential scans you may be better off with the large SATA drives as > they fit more data per track and so give great sequential read rates. True, I just looked at the Hitachi 7200 RPM 2TB Ultrastar and it lists and average throughput of 134 Megabytes/second which is quite good. While seek time is about double that of a 15krpm drive, short stroking can lower that quite a bit. Latency is still 2x as much, but there's not much to do about that. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
