From: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | POSTGRES-PERFORMANCE <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: how much mem to give postgres? |
Date: | 2004-10-20 18:39:22 |
Message-ID: | 20041020183922.GB2120@gp.word-to-the-wise.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 07:16:18PM +0100, Matt Clark wrote:
> ><OT>
> >Hyperthreading is actually an excellent architectural feature that
> >can give significant performance gains when implemented well and used
> >for an appropriate workload under a decently HT aware OS.
> >
> >IMO, typical RDBMS streams are not an obviously appropriate workload,
> >Intel didn't implement it particularly well and I don't think there
> >are any OSes that support it particularly well.
> ></OT>
> >
> >But don't write off using it in the future, when it's been improved
> >at both the OS and the silicon levels.
> >
> >
> >
> You are quite right of course - unfortunately the current Intel
> implementation meets nearly none of these criteria!
Indeed. And when I said "no OSes support it particularly well" I meant
the x86 SMT implementation, rather than SMT in general.
As Rod pointed out, AIX seems to have decent support and Power has a
very nice implementation, and the same is probably true for at least
one other OS/architecture implementation.
> As Rod Taylor pointed out off-list, IBM's SMT implementation on the
> Power5 is vastly superior. Though he's also just told me that Sun
> is beating IBM on price/performance for his workload, so who knows
> how reliable a chap he is... ;-)
:)
Cheers,
Steve
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Wong | 2004-10-20 22:05:28 | Re: futex results with dbt-3 |
Previous Message | Matt Clark | 2004-10-20 18:16:18 | Re: how much mem to give postgres? |