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

Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance

From: Craig James <cjames(at)emolecules(dot)com>
To: david(at)digitaldogma(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance
Date: 2012-10-09 16:43:18
Message-ID: CAFwQ8rfWEZDU3Pn4ZC24enA3phop-QGwFRNidnLyMVucP08rHA@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 9:14 AM, David Thomas <david(at)digitaldogma(dot)org> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:40:31PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> >    Nobody has commented on the hyperthreading question yet ... does it
> >    really matter? The old (fast) server has hyperthreading disabled, and
> >    the new (slower) server has hyperthreads enabled.
> >    If hyperthreading is definitely NOT an issue, it will save me a trip
> to
> >    the co-lo facility.
>
> From my reading it seems that hyperthreading hasn't been a major issue
> for quite sometime on modern kernels.
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2004-10/msg00052.php
>
> I doubt it would hurt much, but I wouldn't make a special trip to the
> co-lo to change it.
>

At this point I've discovered no other options, so down to the co-lo I go.
I'm also going to check power-save options and the RAID controller's
built-in configuration to see if I overlooked something there (readahead,
blocksize, whatever).

Craig


> --
> DavidT
>

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Craig JamesDate: 2012-10-09 20:12:55
Subject: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically different performance)
Previous:From: Craig JamesDate: 2012-10-09 16:41:27
Subject: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance

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