X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F4752836
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  5 Aug 2005 09:56:24 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 01448-07
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  5 Aug 2005 12:56:20 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mail2.aeccom.com (port-212-202-101-158.static.qsc.de
	[212.202.101.158])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98A1C5293F
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  5 Aug 2005 09:56:19 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from [192.168.2.12] (port-83-236-156-26.static.qsc.de
	[83.236.156.26]) by mail2.aeccom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id BC565108; Fri,  5 Aug 2005 14:56:23 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <42F361F7.8070201@aeccom.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 14:56:23 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dirk_Lutzeb=E4ck?= <lutzeb@aeccom.com>
Organization: AEC/communications GmbH
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050716)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org,
	Sven Geisler <sgeisler@aeccom.com>
Subject: Re: Performance problems on 4-way AMD Opteron 875 (dual
References: <42F34963.5080403@aeccom.com> <20050805122719.GW19080@mathom.us>
In-Reply-To: <20050805122719.GW19080@mathom.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.077 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL,
	FORGED_RCVD_HELO
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200508/48
X-Sequence-Number: 13795


Michael Stone wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:11:31PM +0200, Dirk Lutzebäck wrote:
>
>> I will compile the latest PostgreSQL 8.1 snapshot for 32bit to 
>> evaluate the new shared buffer code from Tom.
>> I think, the 64bit is slow because my queries are CPU intensive.
>
>
> Have you actually tried it or are you guessing? If you're guessing, then
> compile it as a 64 bit binary and benchmark that.
>
> Mike Stone

We tried it. 64bit 8.1dev was slower than 32bit 8.0.3.

Dirk