Re: Barcelona vs Tigerton

From: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Mindaugas <ml(at)kilimas(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Barcelona vs Tigerton
Date: 2007-09-11 23:00:22
Message-ID: 20070911230022.GH38801@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 10:57:43AM +0300, Mindaugas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Now that both 4x4 out it's time for us to decide which one should be better for our PostgreSQL and Oracle. And especially for Oracle we really need such server to squeeze everything from Oracle licenses. Both of the databases handle OLTP type of the load.

You might take a look at replacing Oracle with EnterpriseDB... but I'm a
bit biased. ;)

> Since we plan to buy 4U HP DL580 or 585 and only very few of them so power ratings are not very critical in this our case.
>
> First benchmarks (http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3091) show that Intel still has more raw CPU power but Barcelona scales much better and also has better memory bandwidth which I believe is quite critical with 16 cores and DB usage pattern.
> On the other hand Intel's X7350 (2.93GHz) has almost 50% advantage in CPU frequency against 2GHz Barcelona.

Databases are all about bandwidth and latency. Compute horsepower almost
never matters.

The only reason I'd look at the clock rate is if it substantially
affects memory IO capability; but from what I've seen, memory seems to
be fairly independent of CPU frequency now-a-days, so I don't think
there's a huge difference there.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2007-09-11 23:02:46 Re: random_page_costs - are defaults of 4.0 realistic for SCSI RAID 1
Previous Message Decibel! 2007-09-11 22:52:42 Re: [Again] Postgres performance problem