From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
To: Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
To: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: 60 core performance with 9.3
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 07:19:13 -0700
Message-ID: <1405952353.75554.YahooMailNeo@web122302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53C71429.3000107@catalyst.net.nz>
References: <53ACB190.2030206@catalyst.net.nz>
<CAOR=d=3=Y6yNtwQenwVBGe6ZgjAeA8PwgYb3=aQEKn+vYWhBJA@mail.gmail.com>
<53ACD6C4.9050605@catalyst.net.nz>
<20140627091951.GA16680@awork2.anarazel.de>
<53B283F3.7020005@catalyst.net.nz>
<20140701101307.GO21422@awork2.anarazel.de>
<53BF326F.2070903@catalyst.net.nz>
<20140711082207.GI17261@awork2.anarazel.de>
<53BFA63C.60909@catalyst.net.nz>
<1405084749.26978.YahooMailNeo@web122306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
<53C71429.3000107@catalyst.net.nz>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz> wrote:
> On 12/07/14 01:19, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>>
>> It might be worth a test using a cpuset to interleave OS cache and
>> the NUMA patch I submitted to the current CF to see whether this is
>> getting into territory where the patch makes a bigger difference.
>> I would expect it to do much better than using numactl --interleave
>> because work_mem and other process-local memory would be allocated
>> in "near" memory for each process.
>>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1402267501.41111.YahooMailNeo@web122304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
>
> Thanks Kevin - I did try this out - seemed slightly better than using
> --interleave, but almost identical to the results posted previously.
>
> However looking at my postgres binary with ldd, I'm not seeing any link
> to libnuma (despite it demanding the library whilst building), so I
> wonder if my package build has somehow vanilla-ified the result :-(
That is odd; not sure what to make of that!
> Also I am guessing that with 60 cores I do:
>
> $ sudo /bin/bash -c "echo 0-59 >/dev/cpuset/postgres/cpus"
>
> i.e cpus are cores not packages...?
Right; basically, as a guide, you can use the output from:
$ numactl --hardware
Use the union of all the "cpu" numbers from the "node n cpus" lines. The
above statement is also a good way to see how unbalance memory usage has
become while running a test.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
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: kgrittn@ymail.com, mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz, andres@2ndquadrant.com
Subject: Re: 60 core performance with 9.3
In-Reply-To: <1405952353.75554.YahooMailNeo@web122302.mail.ne1.yahoo.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