Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?

From: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
To: "Sven Geisler" <sgeisler(at)aeccom(dot)com>, "Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail))" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?
Date: 2006-06-13 11:33:19
Message-ID: C0B3F08F.26F80%llonergan@greenplum.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Sven,

On 6/13/06 2:04 AM, "Sven Geisler" <sgeisler(at)aeccom(dot)com> wrote:

> Please find attached a small patch with does apply a change to the
> x86_64 part also to the i386 part of src/include/storage/s_lock.h.
> Without this change the performance of PostgreSQL 8.0 was horrible on a
> Opteron. The effect is smaller with PostgreSQL 8.1.

Can you describe what kinds of tests you ran to check your speed?

Since it's the TAS lock that you are patching, the potential impact is
diffuse and large: xlog.c, shmem.c, lwlock.c, proc.c, all do significant
work.

- Luke

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Guido Neitzer 2006-06-13 11:48:26 Re: Posrgres speed problem - solved!
Previous Message PFC 2006-06-13 10:47:54 Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards?