Re: Spin Lock sleep resolution - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Gould
Subject Re: Spin Lock sleep resolution
Date
Msg-id 20130618050350.6b15a108@jekyl.davidgould.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Spin Lock sleep resolution  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:41:06 +0300
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> wrote:

> Oh, interesting. What kind of hardware are you running on? To be honest, 
> I'm not sure what my test hardware is, it's managed by another team 
> across the world, but /proc/cpuinfo says:
> 
> model name    : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-4640 0 @ 2.40GHz

It claims to have 80 of these:
 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7-L8867  @2.13GHz

Postgres is on ramfs on these with unlogged tables.


> And it's running in a virtual machine on VMware; that might also be a 
> factor.

I'm not a fan of virtualization. It makes performance even harder to
reason about.

> It would be good to test the TAS_SPIN nonlocked patch on a variety of 
> systems. The comments in s_lock.h say that on Opteron, the non-locked 
> test is a huge loss. In particular, would be good to re-test that on a 
> modern AMD system.

I'll see what I can do. However I don't have acces to any large modern AMD
systems.

-dg


-- 
David Gould              510 282 0869         daveg@sonic.net
If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "MauMau"
Date:
Subject: Memory leak in PL/pgSQL function which CREATE/SELECT/DROP a temporary table
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review])