| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, gmaxwell(at)gmail(dot)com, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches |
| Date: | 2005-09-17 04:31:41 |
| Message-ID: | 4672.1126931501@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Greg Stark (gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu) wrote:
>> However I was under the impression that 2.6 had moved beyond that problem.
>> It would be very interesting to know if 2.6 still suffers from this.
> The tests on the em64t at my place were using 2.6.12. I had thought 2.6
> was better about this too, but I don't have another explanation for it.
The 4-way Opteron I've been using at Red Hat is running
2.6.12-1.1398_FC4smp (Fedora Core 4 obviously). Red Hat in particular
has been working hard in this area, and I thought that their recent
kernels included NUMA fixes that weren't yet accepted upstream (at least
not in the stable kernel branches). But it seems there's still a ways
to go yet.
It'd be real interesting to see comparable numbers from some non-Linux
kernels, particularly commercial systems like Solaris.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2005-09-17 04:41:12 | Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-09-17 04:31:16 | Re: [HACKERS] statement_timeout logging |