David Lang wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2005, Alan Stange wrote:
>> Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
>>> I guess it depends on what you term as your metric for measurement.
>>> If it is just one query execution time .. It may not be the best on
>>> UltraSPARC T1.
>>> But if you have more than 8 complex queries running simultaneously,
>>> UltraSPARC T1 can do well compared comparatively provided the
>>> application can scale also along with it.
>> I just want to clarify one issue here. It's my understanding that
>> the 8-core, 4 hardware thread (known as strands) system is seen as a
>> 32 cpu system by Solaris. So, one could have up to 32 postgresql
>> processes running in parallel on the current systems (assuming the
>> application can scale).
> note that like hyperthreading, the strands aren't full processors,
> their efficiancy depends on how much other threads shareing the core
> stall waiting for external things.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Oleg Bartunov||Date: 2005-12-20 15:18:20|
|Subject: Re: High context switches occurring |
|Previous:||From: David Lang||Date: 2005-12-20 15:08:21|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Ultrasparc T1|