X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5704B11F66E8 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 19:08:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65645-04 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 19:08:31 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from exchange.g2switchworks.com (mail.g2switchworks.com [63.87.162.25]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1796811F66D8 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 19:08:29 -0300 (ADT) Received: from 10.10.1.37 ([10.10.1.37]) by exchange.g2switchworks.com ([10.10.1.2]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 22:08:29 +0000 Received: from state.g2switchworks.com by mail.g2switchworks.com; 05 Apr 2006 17:08:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3 From: Scott Marlowe To: "Juan Casero (FL FLC)" Cc: Luke Lonergan , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <7583B3F1891CC0429FA4A44952AA539C66FA6D@wfm-exchprd2.wfm.pvt> References: <7583B3F1891CC0429FA4A44952AA539C66FA6D@wfm-exchprd2.wfm.pvt> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1144274909.32266.91.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:08:29 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.14 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] X-Spam-Score: 0.14 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200604/74 X-Sequence-Number: 18158 On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 15:54, Juan Casero (FL FLC) wrote: > I am not sure about this. I mean I have postgresql 8.1.3 running on my > Windows XP P4 HT laptop that I use for testing my webapps. When I hit > this pgsql on this laptop with a large query I can see the load spike up > really high on both of my virtual processors. Whatever, pgsql is doing > it looks like both cpu's are being used indepently. The usage curve is > not identical on both of them that makes me think that parts of the > server are multithreaded. Admittedly I am not familiar with the source > code fo postgresql so I was hoping maybe one of the developers who is > could definitely answer this question. I think that really depends on your workload. Are you going to have a dozen or so transactions running at a time? then regular postgresql is probably ok. If you're gonna be running only one or two big, fat, hairy reporting queries, then you might wanna look at the bizgress mpp version. Note that some queries lend themselves to parallel processing more than others.