From: Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>
To: Dan Harris <fbsd@drivefaster.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: quad or dual core Intel CPUs
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:49:36 +0100
Message-ID: <1d4e0c10702131449x480219d7pfd6797b7ca31ad2d@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45D239D3.5020501@drivefaster.net>
References: <20070213194610.GA10789@juniper.net>
<45D22829.8050503@tweakers.net>
<45D239D3.5020501@drivefaster.net>
Dan,
On 2/13/07, Dan Harris <fbsd@drivefaster.net> wrote:
> Having upgraded to 2.6.18 fairly recently, I am *very* interested in
> what caused the throughput to drop in 2.6.18? I haven't done any
> benchmarking on my system to know if it affected my usage pattern
> negatively, but I am curious if anyone knows why this happened?
I think you misread the graph. PostgreSQL 8.2 seems to be
approximately 20% faster with kernel 2.6.18 on the platforms tested
(and using tweakers.net benchmark).
--
Guillaume
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: guillaume.smet@gmail.com, fbsd@drivefaster.net
Subject: Re: quad or dual core Intel CPUs
In-Reply-To: <1d4e0c10702131449x480219d7pfd6797b7ca31ad2d@mail.gmail.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