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
> > the co-lo facility.
> From my reading it seems that hyperthreading hasn't been a major issue
> for quite sometime on modern kernels.
> 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,
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Craig James||Date: 2012-10-09 20:12:55|
|Subject: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically different performance)|
|Previous:||From: Craig James||Date: 2012-10-09 16:41:27|
|Subject: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance|