From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com, Paul Tuckfield <paul(at)tuckfield(dot)com>, Anjan Dave <adave(at)vantage(dot)com>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Dirk Lutzebäck <lutzeb(at)aeccom(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Wierd context-switching issue on Xeon patch for 7.4.1 |
Date: | 2004-04-22 18:31:22 |
Message-ID: | 200404221831.i3MIVMl22821@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Tom,
>
> > Having to recompile to run on single- vs dual-processor machines doesn't
> > seem like it would fly.
>
> Oh, I don't know. Many applications require compiling for a target
> architecture; SQL Server, for example, won't use a 2nd processor without
> re-installation. I'm not sure about Oracle.
>
> It certainly wasn't too long ago that Linux gurus were esposing re-compiling
> the kernel for the machine.
>
> And it's not like they would *have* to re-compile to use PostgreSQL after
> adding an additional processor. Just if they wanted to maximize peformance
> benefit.
>
> Also, this is a fairly rare circumstance, I think; to judge by my clients,
> once a database server is in production nobody touches the hardware.
A much simpler solution would be for the postmaster to run a test during
startup.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pailloncy Jean-Gérard | 2004-04-22 18:46:51 | Re: 225 times slower |
Previous Message | Markus Bertheau | 2004-04-22 18:20:47 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] MySQL vs PG TPC-H benchmarks |