From: | Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Juan Casero (FL FLC)" <Juan(dot)Casero(at)wholefoods(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3 |
Date: | 2006-04-06 03:41:16 |
Message-ID: | 44348DDC.60505@sun.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Tom is right. Unless your workload can generate lots of simultaneous
queries, you will not reap the full benefit of the Sun Fire T2000
system. I have tested 8.1.3 with an OLTP workload on an 8 cores system.
With 1500-2000 client connections, the CPU was only about 30% utilized.
The UltraSPARC T1 processor was designed for throughput with many cores
running at lower frequency (1-1.2 GHz) to reduce power consumption. To
speed up a single big query, you'd be better off with a parallelize DB
or an Opteron system with higher clock speed like this one
http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/x4200/
Regards,
-Robert
Tom Lane wrote:
>"Juan Casero \(FL FLC\)" <Juan(dot)Casero(at)wholefoods(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>... This box has a single Ultrasparc T1 cpu with six execution
>>piplelines that can each handle 4 threads. With the Unix top utility
>>the postgresql server appears to bounce around between the available
>>threads on the system.
>>
>>
>
>Try sending it more than one query at a time? If you're testing with
>just one client connection issuing queries, that's about what I'd expect.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Lor | 2006-04-06 04:15:45 | Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3 |
Previous Message | Anthony Ransley | 2006-04-06 03:35:47 | Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3 |