Re: CPUs for new databases - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From James Cloos
Subject Re: CPUs for new databases
Date
Msg-id m3ocagplgf.fsf@jhcloos.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CPUs for new databases  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: CPUs for new databases  (Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>)
List pgsql-performance
>>>>> "JB" == Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:

JB> In a general workload, fewer faster cores are better.  We do not scale
JB> perfectly across cores.  The only case where that's not true is
JB> maintaining lots of idle connections, and that's really better dealt
JB> with in software.

I've found that ram speed is the most limiting factor I've run into for
those cases where the db fits in RAM.  The less efficient lookups run
just as fast when the CPU is in powersving mode as in performance, which
implies that the cores are mostly waiting on RAM (cache or main).

I suspect cache size and ram speed will be the most important factors
until the point where disk i/o speed and capacity take over.

I'm sure some db applications run computaionally expensive queries on
the server, but most queries seem light on computaion and heavy on
gathering and comparing.

It can help to use recent versions of gcc with -march=native.  And
recent versions of glibc offer improved string ops on recent hardware.

-JimC
--
James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Ozer, Pam"
Date:
Subject: Slow Query- Bad Row Estimate
Next
From: Ivan Voras
Date:
Subject: Re: CPUs for new databases