Re: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically different performance)
| От | Shaun Thomas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically different performance) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 50756F95.7040006@optionshouse.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically different performance) (Craig James <cjames@emolecules.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically
different performance)
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
On 10/09/2012 06:30 PM, Craig James wrote: > ra:8192 walb:1M ra:256 walb:1M ra:256 walb:256kB > ---------------- ---------------- ----------------- > -c -t Run1 Run2 Run3 Run4 Run5 Run6 Run7 Run8 Run9 > 40 2500 4261 3722 4243 9286 9240 5712 9310 8530 8872 > 50 2000 4138 4399 3865 9213 9351 9578 8011 7651 8362 I think I speak for more than a few people here when I say: wat. About the only thing I can ask, is: did you make these tests fair? And by fair, I mean: echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches pg_ctl -D /your/pg/dir restart Between every test to make sure shared buffers and the OS inode cache was empty before the start of each test? If you're using that bash-style for-loop you attached earlier, probably not. Still though, I don't think that would account for this much variance between having read-ahead at 8M as opposed to 256kb. My head hurts. -- Shaun Thomas OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604 312-444-8534 sthomas@optionshouse.com ______________________________________________ See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: