| From: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Sven Geisler" <sgeisler(at)aeccom(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail))" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? |
| Date: | 2006-06-13 12:42:08 |
| Message-ID: | C0B400B0.26F9B%llonergan@greenplum.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Sven,
On 6/13/06 5:03 AM, "Sven Geisler" <sgeisler(at)aeccom(dot)com> wrote:
> Yes, I know. We had a problem last year with the performance of the
> Opteron. We have started the futex patch to resolve the issue. The futex
> patch itself did have no effect, but there was a side effect because the
> futex patch did use also another assembler sequence. This make a hole
> difference on a Opteron. It turned out that removing the lines
>
> cmpb
> jne
> lock
>
> was the reason why the Opteron runs faster.
> I have created a sequence of larger query with following result on
> Opteron 875 and PostgreSQL 8.0.3
> orignal 8.0.3 => 289 query/time and 10% cpu usage
> patched 8.0.3 => 1022 query/time and 45% cpu usage
This was in 64-bit mode on the Opteron?
- Luke
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Antoine | 2006-06-13 12:43:45 | OT - select + must have from - sql standard syntax? |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2006-06-13 12:23:42 | Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit performance ... backwards? |