On 7/11/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Conventional wisdom around here has been that HT doesn't help database
> performance, and that IBM link might provide a hint as to why: the
> only item for which they show a large loss in performance is disk I/O.
> Ooops.
Thanks Tom, great summary. How does this compare with
SMP vs HT?
> Personally I keep HT turned on on my devel machine, because I do find
> that recompiling Postgres is noticeably faster ("make -j4" rocks on a
> dual Xeon w/HT). I doubt that's the benchmark of greatest interest
> to the average *user* of Postgres, though.
Understood :)
> regards, tom lane
Cheers,
Andrej
