From: | "Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej(dot)groups(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Hyper-Trading |
Date: | 2007-07-10 22:18:24 |
Message-ID: | b35603930707101518w42da18c4yb4b93cc735c5f344@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 7/11/07, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 08:09:11PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
>
> > If your operating system is able to schedule the threads/processes across
> > CPUs, PostgreSQL will use them.
>
> But notice that hyperthreading imposes its own overhead. I've not
> seen evidence that enabling hyperthreading actually helps, although I
> may have overlooked a couple of cases.
I don't have any metrics of my own to present (nor do I care enough
to try and gather them), but there are a few tests with kind of varied
results, depending on WHAT one wants to use HT for.
Have a look at these:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-htl/
http://www.2cpu.com/articles/41_6.html
In how far they're relevant to Postgres is left as an
exercise to the reader :}
> A
Cheers,
Andrej
--
Please don't top post, and don't use HTML e-Mail :} Make your quotes concise.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ben | 2007-07-10 22:47:20 | Re: Am I missing something about the output of pg_stop_backup()? |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-07-10 22:13:26 | Re: Am I missing something about the output of pg_stop_backup()? |