| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2006-06-17 02:34:15 |
| Message-ID: | 10226.1150511655@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Interesting. We (some Japanese companies including SRA OSS,
> Inc. Japan) did some PG scalability testing using a Unisys's big 16
> (physical) CPU machine and found PG scales up to 8 CPUs. However
> beyond 8 CPU PG does not scale anymore. The result can be viewed at
> "OSS iPedia" web site (http://ossipedia.ipa.go.jp) Our conclusion was
> PG has a serious lock contention problem in the environment by
> analyzing the oprofile result.
18% in s_lock is definitely bad :-(. Were you able to determine which
LWLock(s) are accounting for the contention?
The test case seems to be spending a remarkable amount of time in LIKE
comparisons, too. That probably is not a representative condition.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-17 02:58:05 | Exporting type OID macros in a cleaner fashion |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-17 02:26:27 | Re: Curious bug in buildfarm files-changed links |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Lor | 2006-06-17 04:17:04 | Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL community |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2006-06-17 02:18:38 | Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL |