| From: | "Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej(dot)groups(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hyper-Trading |
| Date: | 2007-07-11 00:34:13 |
| Message-ID: | b35603930707101734g1f6e9bf8y893a6c67b957b2bc@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 7/11/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Conventional wisdom around here has been that HT doesn't help database
> performance, and that IBM link might provide a hint as to why: the
> only item for which they show a large loss in performance is disk I/O.
> Ooops.
Thanks Tom, great summary. How does this compare with
SMP vs HT?
> Personally I keep HT turned on on my devel machine, because I do find
> that recompiling Postgres is noticeably faster ("make -j4" rocks on a
> dual Xeon w/HT). I doubt that's the benchmark of greatest interest
> to the average *user* of Postgres, though.
Understood :)
> regards, tom lane
Cheers,
Andrej
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shuo Liu | 2007-07-11 01:12:47 | Re: exit code -1073741819 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-07-11 00:04:41 | Re: exit code -1073741819 |