Re: hyperthreaded cpu still an issue in 8.4? - Mailing list pgsql-performance
From | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Subject | Re: hyperthreaded cpu still an issue in 8.4? |
Date | |
Msg-id | b42b73150907281358w2feacbbh5a3de12a6e13a7b4@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: hyperthreaded cpu still an issue in 8.4? (Dave Youatt <dave@meteorsolutions.com>) |
Responses |
Re: hyperthreaded cpu still an issue in 8.4?
Re: hyperthreaded cpu still an issue in 8.4? |
List | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Dave Youatt<dave@meteorsolutions.com> wrote: > On 01/-10/-28163 11:59 AM, Greg Smith wrote: >> On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Doug Hunley wrote: >> >>> Just wondering is the issue referenced in >>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2005-11/msg00415.php >>> is still present in 8.4 or if some tunable (or other) made the use of >>> hyperthreading a non-issue. We're looking to upgrade our servers soon >>> for performance reasons and am trying to determine if more cpus (no >>> HT) or less cpus (with HT) are the way to go. >> >> If you're talking about the hyperthreading in the latest Intel Nehalem >> processors, I've been seeing great PostgreSQL performance from those. >> The kind of weird behavior the old generation hyperthreading designs >> had seems gone. You can see at >> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/alpine.GSO.2.01.0907222158050.16713@westnet.com >> that I've cleared 90K TPS on a 16 core system (2 quad-core >> hyperthreaded processors) running a small test using lots of parallel >> SELECTs. That would not be possible if there were HT spinlock >> problems still around. There have been both PostgreSQL scaling >> improvments and hardware improvements since the 2005 messages you saw >> there that have combined to clear up the issues there. While true >> cores would still be better if everything else were equal, it rarely >> is, and I wouldn't hestitate to jump on Intel's bandwagon right now. > > Greg, those are compelling numbers for the new Nehalem processors. > Great news for postgresql. Do you think it's due to the new internal > interconnect, that bears a strong resemblance to AMD's hypertransport [snip] as a point of reference, here are some numbers on a quad core system (2xintel 5160) using the old pgbench, scaling factor 10: pgbench -S -c 16 -t 10000 starting vacuum...end. transaction type: SELECT only scaling factor: 10 query mode: simple number of clients: 16 number of transactions per client: 10000 number of transactions actually processed: 160000/160000 tps = 24088.807000 (including connections establishing) tps = 24201.820189 (excluding connections establishing) This shows actually my system (pre-Nehalem) is pretty close clock for clock, albeit thats not completely fair..I'm using only 4 cores on dual core procs. Still, these are almost two years old now. EDIT: I see now that Greg has only 8 core system not counting hyperthreading...so I'm getting absolutely spanked! Go Intel! Also, I'm absolutely dying to see some numbers on the high end W5580...if anybody has one, please post! merlin
pgsql-performance by date: