| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kurt Roeckx <kurt(at)roeckx(dot)be>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches |
| Date: | 2005-09-12 03:40:11 |
| Message-ID: | 87ll232btw.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Something else to consider is the OS you're using. I've been
> > told that Linux isn't that good in NUMA and FreeBSD might be
> > better.
>
> It's hard to see how the OS could affect behavior at the level of
> processor cache operations --- unless they did something truly
> spectacularly stupid, like mark main memory non-cacheable.
Well it could schedule processes on processors in ways that force less than
optimal memory usage patterns.
But maybe you should tell the Altix folk with their 32-processor 384Gb NUMA
machines what you've "been told" about Linux not being that good in NUMA.
Really, these kind of cargo cult anecdotes are pretty pointless.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-09-12 03:58:17 | Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-09-12 03:37:06 | Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches |