| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Peacetree <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net> |
| Cc: | mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>, Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs |
| Date: | 2006-04-26 22:16:31 |
| Message-ID: | 20060426221631.GA97354@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 11:07:17PM -0400, Ron Peacetree wrote:
> A minor point to be noted in addition here is that most DB servers under load are limited by their physical IO subsystem, their HDs, and not the speed of their RAM.
I think if that were the only consideration we wouldn't be seeing such a
dramatic difference between AMD and Intel though. Even in a disk-bound
server, caching is going to have a tremendous impact, and that's
essentially entirely bound by memory bandwith and latency.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-04-26 22:16:46 | Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-04-26 22:14:47 | Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs |