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

Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>
Cc: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com>,pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs
Date: 2006-04-26 22:09:29
Message-ID: 20060426220929.GY97354@pervasive.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:27:18AM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> If you haven't actually run a heavy benchmark of postgresql on the two
> architectures, please don't make your decision based on other
> benchmarks.  Since you've got both a D920 and an X2 3800, that'd be a
> great place to start.  Mock up some benchmark with a couple dozen
> threads hitting the server at once and see if the Intel can keep up.  It

Or better yet, use dbt* or even pgbench so others can reproduce...
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2006-04-26 22:14:47
Subject: Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs
Previous:From: Steve PoeDate: 2006-04-26 20:08:59
Subject: Re: Introducing a new linux readahead framework

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