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

Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs

From: William Yu <wyu(at)talisys(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs
Date: 2006-04-26 15:24:35
Message-ID: e2o3bk$1v7h$1@news.hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
David Boreham wrote:
> It isn't only Postgres. I work on a number of other server applications
> that also run much faster on Opterons than the published benchmark
> figures would suggest they should. They're all compiled with gcc4,
> so possibly there's a compiler issue. I don't run Windows on any
> of our Opteron boxes so I can't easily compare using the MS compiler.


Maybe it's just a fact that the majority of x86 64-bit development for 
open source software happens on Opteron/A64 machines. 64-bit AMD 
machines were selling a good year before 64-bit Intel machines were 
available. And even after Intel EMT64 were available, anybody in their 
right mind would have picked AMD machines over Intel due to 
cost/heat/performance. So you end up with 64-bit OSS being 
developed/optimized for Opterons and the 10% running Intel EMT64 handle 
compatibility issues.

Would be interesting to see a survey of what machines OSS developers use 
to write/test/optimize their code.

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2006-04-26 15:27:18
Subject: Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs
Previous:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2006-04-26 15:17:58
Subject: Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs

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