Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance
Date
Msg-id 20101007020707.GP26232@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance
List pgsql-performance
Tree view 
* Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> It's good to be you.

They're HP BL465 G7's w/ 2x 12-core AMD processors and 48G of RAM.
Unfortunately, they currently only have local storage, but it seems
unlikely that would be an issue for this.

> I don't suppose you could try to replicate the lseek() contention?

I can give it a shot, but the impression I had from the paper is that
the lseek() contention wouldn't be seen without the changes to the lock
manager...?  Or did I misunderstand?

    Thanks,

        Stephen
Attachment

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance
Next
From: "Sander, Ingo (NSN - DE/Munich)"
Date:
Subject: Re: Runtime dependency from size of a bytea field