From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, "Stuart Bishop" <stuart(at)stuartbishop(dot)net>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Dual core Opterons beating quad core Xeons? |
Date: | 2007-12-19 19:03:32 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10712191103p1224b6c2vc51f70a85fae5c49@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Dec 19, 2007 12:59 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:50:29 -0500 (EST)
> Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > > With PG 8.2 and 8.3, is it still pretty much limited to 8 cores
> > > making 2 of the quad core Xeons redundant or detrimental?
> >
> > Where'd you get the idea 8 cores was a limit? As cores go up
> > eventually you run out of disk or memory bandwidth, but how that
> > plays out is very application dependant and there's no hard line
> > anywhere.
>
> Actually this is not true. Although I have yet to test 8.3. It is
> pretty much common knowledge that after 8 cores the acceleration of
> performance drops with PostgreSQL...
I thought Tom had played with some simple hacks that got the scaling
pretty close to linear for up to 16 cores earlier this year...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-12-19 19:07:44 | Re: Dual core Opterons beating quad core Xeons? |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-12-19 18:59:21 | Re: Dual core Opterons beating quad core Xeons? |