Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From mark@mark.mielke.cc
Subject Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs
Date
Msg-id 20060427025602.GA19089@mark.mielke.cc
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 05:37:31PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 06:16:46PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > AMD transfers the dirty cache line directly from cpu to cpu.  I can
> > imaging that helping our test-and-set shared memory usage quite a bit.
> Wasn't the whole point of test-and-set that it's the recommended way to
> do lightweight spinlocks according to AMD/Intel? You'd think they'd have
> a way to make that performant on multiple CPUs (though if it's relying
> on possibly modifying an underlying data page I can't really think of
> how to do that without snaking through the cache...)

It's expensive no matter what. One method might be less expensive than
another. :-)

AMD definately seems to have things right for lowest absolute latency.
2X still sounds like an extreme case - but until I've actually tried a
very large, or thread intensive PostgreSQL db on both, I probably
shouldn't doubt the work of others too much. :-)

Cheers,
mark

--
mark@mielke.cc / markm@ncf.ca / markm@nortel.com     __________________________
.  .  _  ._  . .   .__    .  . ._. .__ .   . . .__  | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/    |_     |\/|  |  |_  |   |/  |_   |
|  | | | | \ | \   |__ .  |  | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__  | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

  One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
                       and in the darkness bind them...

                           http://mark.mielke.cc/


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Will Reese
Date:
Subject: Re: Slow deletes in 8.1 when FKs are involved
Next
From: Steve Wampler
Date:
Subject: Re: Running on an NFS Mounted Directory