| From: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some wierdness |
| Date: | 2004-10-10 09:25:23 |
| Message-ID: | 41690003.2010905@bigfoot.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I'm hoping that some of you can shed some light on this.
>
> I've been trying to peg the "sweet spot" for shared memory using OSDL's
> equipment. With Jan's new ARC patch, I was expecting that the desired
> amount of shared_buffers to be greatly increased. This has not turned out to
> be the case.
>
> The first test series was using OSDL's DBT2 (OLTP) test, with 150
> "warehouses". All tests were run on a 4-way Pentium III 700mhz 3.8GB RAM
> system hooked up to a rather high-end storage device (14 spindles). Tests
> were on PostgreSQL 8.0b3, Linux 2.6.7.
I'd like to see these tests running using the cpu affinity capability in order
to oblige a backend to not change CPU during his life, this could drastically
increase the cache hit.
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Garamond | 2004-10-10 11:07:54 | Re: postgres vulnerability |
| Previous Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2004-10-10 09:13:27 | Re: postgres vulnerability |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dennis Bjorklund | 2004-10-10 21:48:48 | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |
| Previous Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2004-10-10 09:19:59 | kernel 2.6 synchronous directory |