DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer
	:thread-index:content-language;
	b=UsEYBtbLMWhKawWHJo0nH2o1MUaIleGBBDzR909JjHMvrfVs3F9wrHEx0wYDS4mdLL
	Lw+13pboWzop5s+DBfd2p9giWaAJhg4lGFLohRmimwaGl6GaKRPE9NFYsPIBtsgZSa5b
	ZvjoxJ0F8OQKcTI3hfOhHFLMkDQPL9aCoBWsc=
From: "mark" <dvlhntr@gmail.com>
To: "'Scott Marlowe'" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>,
	"'Glyn Astill'" <glynastill@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: "'Kevin Grittner'" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>,
	"'Joshua D. Drake'" <jd@commandprompt.com>,
	<pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
References: <8b76c51ad6db2e458431ef73bcdd2759@commandprompt.com>
	<895662.51387.qm@web26005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTik2+T3xmpStJNVxWzXQWgxU14bVeA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik2+T3xmpStJNVxWzXQWgxU14bVeA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Linux: more cores = less concurrency.
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:05:22 -0600
Message-ID: <028401cbf8a5$5260f7d0$f722e770$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: Acv4fuMbDfY7nNpiQV2cax9TpvagFQAJL/ng
Content-Language: en-us


> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org =
[mailto:pgsql-performance-
> owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Scott Marlowe
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 1:29 PM
> To: Glyn Astill
> Cc: Kevin Grittner; Joshua D. Drake; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Linux: more cores =3D less concurrency.
>=20
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Glyn Astill <glynastill@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- On Mon, 11/4/11, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Linux: more cores =3D less concurrency.
> >> To: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
> >> Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, "Glyn Astill"
> <glynastill@yahoo.co.uk>
> >> Date: Monday, 11 April, 2011, 19:12
> >> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:09:15 -0500,
> >> "Kevin Grittner"
> >> <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Glyn Astill <glynastill@yahoo.co.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> The new server uses 4 x 8 core Xeon X7550 CPUs at
> >> 2Ghz
> >> >
> >> > Which has hyperthreading.
> >> >
> >> >> our current servers are 2 x 4 core Xeon E5320 CPUs
> >> at 2Ghz.
> >> >
> >> > Which doesn't have hyperthreading.
> >> >
> >
> > Yep, off. If you look at the benchmarks I took, HT absoloutely =
killed
> it.
> >
> >> > PostgreSQL often performs worse with hyperthreading
> >> than without.
> >> > Have you turned HT off on your new machine?=A0 If
> >> not, I would start
> >> > there.
> >>
> >> And then make sure you aren't running CFQ.
> >>
> >> JD
> >>
> >
> > Not running CFQ, running the no-op i/o scheduler.
>=20
> Just FYI, in synthetic pgbench type benchmarks, a 48 core AMD Magny
> Cours with LSI HW RAID and 34 15k6 Hard drives scales almost linearly
> up to 48 or so threads, getting into the 7000+ tps range.  With SW
> RAID it gets into the 5500 tps range.

Just wondering, which LSI card ?
Was this 32 drives in Raid 1+0 with a two drive raid 1 for logs or some
other config?


-M


>=20
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-
> performance@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance