Re: spinlocks on powerpc

From: Manabu Ori <manabu(dot)ori(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: spinlocks on powerpc
Date: 2012-01-02 17:10:31
Message-ID: CADWW1HGMPf2+21JkU7AXcXEYhY8ASZW8E=B1JwPnRb5-5MzJSg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

By the way...

2012/1/2 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> (It's depressing that these numbers have hardly moved since August ---
> at least on this test, the work that Robert's done has not made any
> difference.)

I merged some results and created another graph.
Please find an attached png file and you'll see obvious
performance improvement...

All the results are run on the same system:
Power 750 (32 physical cores, virtually 128 cores using SMT4)
mem: 256GB
OS: RHEL6.1 kernel 2.6.32-131.0.15.el6.ppc64
gcc version 4.4.5 20110214 (Red Hat 4.4.5-6)

Attachment Content-Type Size
pgbench-Power750-20120102-2.png image/png 121.8 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-01-02 17:17:31 Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2012-01-02 17:09:16 Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe