| From: | "Uwe C(dot) Schroeder" <uwe(at)oss4u(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Tom Allison <tom(at)tacocat(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: CPU |
| Date: | 2007-12-04 03:12:24 |
| Message-ID: | 200712031912.24205.uwe@oss4u.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Monday 03 December 2007, Tom Allison wrote:
> is there much of a difference in performance between a XEON, dual
> core from intel and a dual core AMD 64 CPU?
>
> I need a bit of an upgrade and am not sure which, if any, have a
> significant advantage for postgres databases.
>
Personally I've never seen postgresql suck majorly on CPU performance. I guess
the biggest speed increase lies in ultra fast I/O, i.e. high spinning disks
and battery backed hardware RAID. Databases tend to suck more on I/O than
processor unless you do a lot fo sorting, distinct selects etc.
Multi or single processor is just a matter of how many clients connect. AFAIK
postgresql is not really multi-threaded, but runs each connection (master
process) on one processor at a time. So if you have a quad core (or 4
processor machine), you'll have 4 postmasters "processing" any given time -
the bottleneck again is I/O because usually all processors share the same
ressources (memory and disks).
So basically I would invest in fast I/O and would care less about the
processors. More memory at hand may also be beneficial.
U.C.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-12-04 03:27:31 | Re: CPU |
| Previous Message | Efraín López | 2007-12-04 02:48:37 | libpq messages language |