From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
To: Arjen van der Meijden <acmmailing@tweakers.net>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Ballet <jon@multani.info>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Performances with new Intel Core* processors
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 15:27:45 -0500
Message-ID: <1154377665.6095.16.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44CE3023.3020402@tweakers.net>
References: <44CDFD44.8080307@multani.info>
<b42b73150607310852o347833a1l5866681b9fbf0124@mail.gmail.com>
<44CE3023.3020402@tweakers.net>
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 11:30, Arjen van der Meijden wrote:
> On 31-7-2006 17:52, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> For a database system, however, processors hardly ever are the main
> bottleneck, are they? So you should probably go for a set of "fast
> processors" from your favorite supplier and focus mainly on lots of
> memory and fast disks. Whether that employs Opterons or Xeon Woodcrest
> (no other Xeons are up to that competition, imho) doesn't really matter.
Just making a quick comment here. While the CPU core itself nowadays
certainly is not the most common bottleneck for a fast db server, the
ability of the CPU/Memory combo to act as a datapump IS often a limit.
In that case, you want to go with whichever setup gives you the fastest
access to memory.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: smarlowe@g2switchworks.com, acmmailing@tweakers.net, mmoncure@gmail.com, jon@multani.info
Subject: Re: Performances with new Intel Core* processors
In-Reply-To: <1154377665.6095.16.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox