From: Emil Briggs <emil@baymountain.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Status of Opteron vs Xeon
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:03:47 -0400
Message-ID: <200510071503.47373.emil@baymountain.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60r7axjkpj.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510061654080.21147@discord.dyndns.org>
<60r7axjkpj.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com>
>
> Furthermore, it does not do anything to address the consideration that
> memory access on Opterons seem to be intrinsically faster than on Xeon
> due to differences in the memory bus architecture.
>
I have been running some tests using different numa policies on a quad Opteron
server and have found some significant performance differences depending on
the type of load the system is under. It's not clear to me yet if I can draw
any general conclusions from the results though.
Emil
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: emil@baymountain.com, cbbrowne@acm.org
Subject: Re: Status of Opteron vs Xeon
In-Reply-To: <200510071503.47373.emil@baymountain.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