"Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej.groups@gmail.com> writes:
> On 7/11/07, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> wrote:
>> But notice that hyperthreading imposes its own overhead. I've not
>> seen evidence that enabling hyperthreading actually helps, although I
>> may have overlooked a couple of cases.
> Have a look at these:
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-htl/
> http://www.2cpu.com/articles/41_6.html
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.
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.
regards, tom lane