> Looks like comparing oranges and limes with apples and lemons to me ! Yeah, I am giving the Windows Server every possible advantage <g>. heh-heh... I really want to just get a feel for how heavy a load the Compaq can take on before I need to upgrade the RAM, or pop in a spare SCSI HDD in the Compaq. I like to hold onto at least one spare SCSI in case one fails in one of the other Servers. And, I figure that at some point the Compaq will end up being used to provide service to folks connected via VPN/Internet - so the SATA HDD performance will become less of an issue as compared to the data throughput. We will see <g>... In reality I will likely end up moving the Compaq to 4Gb RAM (cuz it is so cheap to do so), and put at least a 73Gb SCSI in it for the PostgreSQL database. Summer project, lots going on as it is.
Gil > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul Newton > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] RE: Microsoft New SQL OS >>> PostgreSQL info > > > Gil > > the Dell has 3Gb RAM and uses a non-boot SCSI HDD for the PG database, the > Compaq has 1.5Gb RAM, and uses its boot SATA HDD for its PG database. > > Looks like comparing oranges and limes with apples and lemons to me ! > > Paul Newton > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
