David Kerr <d...@mr-paradox.net> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 04:43:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> - How much more "real" is the target hardware than what you have?
> - You appear to need about a factor of 10 better disk throughput than
> - you have, and that's not going to be too cheap.
> The hardware i'm using is a 5 or 6 year old POS IBM Blade. we haven't
> specced the new hardware yet but I would say that it will be sigificantly
> better.
The point I was trying to make is that it's the disk subsystem, not
the CPU, that is going to make or break you.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
