| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri <dimitrik(dot)fr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |
| Date: | 2009-05-14 17:03:47 |
| Message-ID: | 1242320627.3843.563.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 14:28 +0200, Dimitri wrote:
> As problem I'm considering a scalability issue on Read-Only workload -
> only selects, no disk access, and if on move from 8 to 16 cores we
> gain near 100%, on move from 16 to 32 cores it's only 10%...
Dimitri,
Will you be re-running the Read-Only tests?
Can you run the Dtrace script to assess LWlock contention during the
run?
Would you re-run the tests with a patch?
Thanks,
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Carey | 2009-05-14 17:10:06 | Re: AMD Shanghai versus Intel Nehalem |
| Previous Message | Scott Carey | 2009-05-14 17:01:02 | Re: AMD Shanghai versus Intel Nehalem |