From: | Helge Bahmann <bahmann(at)math(dot)tu-freiberg(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Henrik Steffen <steffen(at)city-map(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
Date: | 2002-11-11 11:56:11 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0211111247280.419-100000@hermes.vpn |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
FWIW, in summer I have done a little bit of testing on one of our
dual-cpu machines; among this I have been running OSDB (open source
database benchmark), 32 simulated clients, against Postgres (7.2.1)/Linux
(2.4.18), once bootet with maxcpus=1 and once with maxcpus=2; if I
remember correctly I saw something between 80-90% performance improvement
on the IR benchmark with the second cpu activated.
Note the run was completely cpu-bound, neither harddisk nor memory was the
bottleneck, so you may see less of an improvement if other parts of your
system are the limit; but Postgres itself appears to make use of the
available cpus quite nicely.
Regards
--
Helge Bahmann <bahmann(at)math(dot)tu-freiberg(dot)de> /| \__
The past: Smart users in front of dumb terminals /_|____\
_/\ | __)
$ ./configure \\ \|__/__|
checking whether build environment is sane... yes \\/___/ |
checking for AIX... no (we already did this) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | turuki | 2002-11-11 12:25:47 | Re: PostgreySQl. |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2002-11-11 10:42:39 | Re: SQL Tuning |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Wei Weng | 2002-11-11 17:19:47 | Re: Slow response from 'SELECT * FROM table' |
Previous Message | Jakub Ouhrabka | 2002-11-11 10:13:01 | Re: Slow response from 'SELECT * FROM table' |