From: David Roussel <pgsql-performance@diroussel.xsmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:03:47 +0100
Message-ID: <449A9533.1030103@diroussel.xsmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44951A42.6060007@tweakers.net>
References: <4492CBE2.3090509@sun.com>
<449331EC.10207@tweakers.net>
<200606161624.17081.josh@agliodbs.com>
<44951A42.6060007@tweakers.net>
Arjen van der Meijden wrote:
>
> Here is a graph of our performance measured on PostgreSQL:
> http://achelois.tweakers.net/~acm/pgsql-t2000/T2000-schaling-postgresql.png
>
>
...
>
> The "perfect" line is based on the "Max" value for 1 core and then
> just multiplied by the amount of cores to have a linear reference. The
> "Bij 50" and the "perfect" line don't differ too much in color, but
> the top-one is the "perfect" line.
Sureky the 'perfect' line ought to be linear? If the performance was
perfectly linear, then the 'pages generated' ought to be G times the
number (virtual) processors, where G is the gradient of the graph. In
such a case the graph will go through the origin (o,o), but you graph
does not show this.
I'm a bit confused, what is the 'perfect' supposed to be?
Thanks
David
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: pgsql-performance@diroussel.xsmail.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL
In-Reply-To: <449A9533.1030103@diroussel.xsmail.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