X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F0209DCA86 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:01:55 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94291-07 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:01:59 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from unicorn.rentec.com (unicorn.rentec.com [216.223.240.9]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 082039DCA87 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:01:52 -0400 (AST) Received: from ram.rentec.com (mailhost [192.5.35.66]) by unicorn.rentec.com (8.13.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id jBKF1SJg025094 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 20 Dec 2005 10:01:29 -0500 (EST) X-Source: non-mednet Received: from [172.26.132.145] (hoopoe.rentec.com [172.26.132.145]) by ram.rentec.com (8.13.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id jBKF0iuW016126; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 10:00:44 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <43A81CE0.7060805@rentec.com> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 10:01:52 -0500 From: Alan Stange Reply-To: stange@rentec.com Organization: Renaissance Technologies Corp. User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.6a1 (X11/20051214) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jignesh K. Shah" CC: Juan Casero , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Ultrasparc T1 References: <200512191932.25699.caseroj@comcast.net> <43A7864D.1090400@sun.com> In-Reply-To: <43A7864D.1090400@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Logged: Logged by unicorn.rentec.com as jBKF1SJg025094 at Tue Dec 20 10:01:29 2005 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none] X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/491 X-Sequence-Number: 16312 Jignesh K. Shah wrote: > I guess it depends on what you term as your metric for measurement. > If it is just one query execution time .. It may not be the best on > UltraSPARC T1. > But if you have more than 8 complex queries running simultaneously, > UltraSPARC T1 can do well compared comparatively provided the > application can scale also along with it. I just want to clarify one issue here. It's my understanding that the 8-core, 4 hardware thread (known as strands) system is seen as a 32 cpu system by Solaris. So, one could have up to 32 postgresql processes running in parallel on the current systems (assuming the application can scale). -- Alan