Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Architecting a database

From: Ben Chobot <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com>
To: tony(at)exquisiteimages(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Architecting a database
Date: 2010-06-30 18:18:33
Message-ID: 042F230C-09C9-45D0-98ED-01009721F1F8@silentmedia.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Jun 30, 2010, at 11:12 AM, tony(at)exquisiteimages(dot)com wrote:

>  I read a post
> earlier today that mentioned in passing that it was better to have a
> faster processor than more cores.

This really depends on your workload and how much you value latency vs. throughput. If you tend to have a lot of very simple queries, more cores => more throughput, and it may not matter much if your queries take 20ms or 30ms if you can be doing a dozen or two more of them concurrently in an AMD system than in an Intel one. On the other hand, if you have less clients, or more latency-sensitive clients, then fewer-but-faster cores is usually a win.

Either way, the amount of power you can get for your money is pretty impressive.

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jignesh ShahDate: 2010-06-30 18:21:42
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache
Previous:From: tonyDate: 2010-06-30 18:12:27
Subject: Re: Architecting a database

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group