On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:04:27AM -0400, Alex Turner wrote: > I have found that even the larger hosting companies such as Rackspace > are pretty clueless when trying to configure even a mid size database > server. They gave us a 4 drive raid 5 even after being explicitly > asked for a RAID 10. They also put the controller in write through > cache mode. Pretty bad config - the server blew chunks, our single > drive ATA cheapo box ran significantly faster. > > I would definatley suggest looking at co-lo. Definitely, yes. The managed facilities tend to be tuned for webserver usage rather than anything else until you get to the high end. <plug> We use http://www.asaservers.com/ as a build-to-order hardware vendor. They also offer very reasonably priced colocation. So you can spec the box you want and they'll build it, install an OS and drop it in their rack (at a decent colo facility). It makes real colo as painless to set up as a managed hosting outfit. If you call 'em, ask for Abhi. </plug> > On 4/25/05, Chris Kratz <chris.kratz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It seems the consensus on this list is that when running postgres, Opterons > > outperform Xeons by a significant margin not to mention the CS storms > > postgres seems to cause on Xeons. We are looking for a hosting service for a > > postgresql based application. Unfortunately, it seems most services > > standardize on Dell and by extension Xeon hardware. Do anyone have > > recommendations for hosting services that would be able to provide Opteron > > based hardware and have decent service? Or are we stuck with Xeons? Cheers, Steve ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
