| From: | Nick Barr <nicky(at)chuckie(dot)co(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Robert Norris <srn(at)commsecure(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Question on Opteron performance |
| Date: | 2004-03-09 10:01:32 |
| Message-ID: | 404D95FC.8020000@chuckie.co.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Stephen Robert Norris wrote:
>On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 14:50, Joseph Shraibman wrote:
>
>
>>Stephen Robert Norris wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Is this true? Did they really double the size of the memory bus, or is
>>>it a case of 4 CPUs fighting for the same memory bandwidth that 2 had
>>>before?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Opertons have built in memory controllers so they scale better than
>>intel chips. See http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.html?i=1982
>>
>>
>
>I didn't realise that. Thanks for the pointer. We're going to be buying
>some more servers soon, I should look at Opterons I guess...
>
> Stephen
>
>
And here is a nice pretty picture of the architecture of a 4 way Opteron.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/AM190_briefv3.pdf
I know which architecture I prefer, the one without a central hub.
Whether the Opteron will perform well for PG I have no idea but we also
are planning some 4 way Opteron boxes to beef up our data center. We
will probably do some benchmarking on those bad boys when we get them
and post it to pgsql-performance if anyone is interested.
Nick
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-03-09 10:19:09 | Re: Character Encoding Confusion |
| Previous Message | nw | 2004-03-09 07:09:21 | Re: Question on Opteron performance |