pg.ddx.io pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedwhich Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
15+ messages / 8 participants
[nested] [flat]
* which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 19:05 Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
0 siblings, 3 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Geoffrey @ 2007-02-23 19:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
Anyone point me to a reference?
Is this in any way related to the version of Postgresql one is running?
We're headed for 8, but have a bit of work before we can get there.
We are currently on 7.4.16.
Thanks for any info.
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 19:33 Claus Guttesen <kometen@gmail.com>
parent: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Claus Guttesen @ 2007-02-23 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
> I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
> don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
>
> In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
> which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
>
> Anyone point me to a reference?
We recently migrated to a woodcrest @ 3 GHz from a 2 Ghz opteron. The
woodcrest seems to be enjoying doing db-related work. I don't have
numbers other than load is much lower now.
> Is this in any way related to the version of Postgresql one is running?
> We're headed for 8, but have a bit of work before we can get there.
> We are currently on 7.4.16.
We are at 7.4.14 which works fine atm.
regards
Claus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 19:38 Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
parent: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Steinar H. Gunderson @ 2007-02-23 19:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:05:57PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
> In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
> which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
AFAIK the cut-off point is at the Woodcrests. They are overall much better
suited to PostgreSQL than the older Xeons were.
It's slightly unfortunate that AMD and Intel cling to the Opteron and Xeon
names even though they're making significant architecture changes, but that's
life, I guess.
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 19:53 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
parent: Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2007-02-23 19:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>; pgsql-performance
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:05:57PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
> > In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
> > which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
>
> AFAIK the cut-off point is at the Woodcrests. They are overall much better
> suited to PostgreSQL than the older Xeons were.
>
> It's slightly unfortunate that AMD and Intel cling to the Opteron and Xeon
> names even though they're making significant architecture changes, but that's
> life, I guess.
AFAIR Intel has been calling their server processors Xeon since Pentium
Pro's, at least.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 20:01 Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
parent: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Steinar H. Gunderson @ 2007-02-23 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance; +Cc: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 04:53:18PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> It's slightly unfortunate that AMD and Intel cling to the Opteron and Xeon
>> names even though they're making significant architecture changes, but that's
>> life, I guess.
> AFAIR Intel has been calling their server processors Xeon since Pentium
> Pro's, at least.
Yes, that was sort of my point. :-)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 21:30 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
parent: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Josh Berkus @ 2007-02-23 21:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance; +Cc: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
Geoffrey,
> I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
> don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
including AMD and Sparc. It's just *worse* on the PIII and P4 generation
Xeons.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 21:33 Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
parent: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Geoffrey @ 2007-02-23 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Geoffrey,
>
>> I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
>> don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
>
> Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
> including AMD and Sparc. It's just *worse* on the PIII and P4 generation
> Xeons.
Thanks, that's what I need to hear. They've since cut a deal for
Operton based hardware, so the point is now moot.
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 21:33 Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
parent: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-02-23 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: josh@agliodbs.com; +Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Geoffrey,
>
>> I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
>> don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
>
> Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
> including AMD and Sparc. It's just *worse* on the PIII and P4 generation
> Xeons.
>
Also isn't it pretty much *not* a problem with current versions of
PostgreSQL?
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 21:49 Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
parent: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Geoffrey @ 2007-02-23 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Geoffrey,
>>
>>> I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
>>> don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
>> Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
>> including AMD and Sparc. It's just *worse* on the PIII and P4 generation
>> Xeons.
>>
>
> Also isn't it pretty much *not* a problem with current versions of
> PostgreSQL?
As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 22:23 Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>
parent: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Guillaume Smet @ 2007-02-23 22:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>; +Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
On 2/23/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> Also isn't it pretty much *not* a problem with current versions of
> PostgreSQL?
We had a really *big* scalability problem with a quad Xeon MP 2.2 and
PostgreSQL 7.4. The problem is mostly gone since we upgraded to 8.1 a
year ago.
Woodcrest seems to perform really well with PostgreSQL according to
what I can read on the Internet so we will probably change the server
for a dual Woodcrest in a few months.
--
Guillaume
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-23 22:25 Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>
parent: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Guillaume Smet @ 2007-02-23 22:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
On 2/23/07, Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net> wrote:
> As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
> our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
to upgrade only to 8 IMHO.
--
Guillaume
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-24 00:56 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
parent: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Magnus Hagander @ 2007-02-24 00:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>; pgsql-performance
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:05:57PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
>>> In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
>>> which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
>> AFAIK the cut-off point is at the Woodcrests. They are overall much better
>> suited to PostgreSQL than the older Xeons were.
>>
>> It's slightly unfortunate that AMD and Intel cling to the Opteron and Xeon
>> names even though they're making significant architecture changes, but that's
>> life, I guess.
>
> AFAIR Intel has been calling their server processors Xeon since Pentium
> Pro's, at least.
>
Almost. Xeon was the new name for the "Pro" series. Instead of Pentium
II Pro, we got Pentium II Xeon. The whole Pentium Pro line was a server
line, which is why initial Pentium-II CPUs were significantly slower for
server apps than the much older ppro (which still runs pg at a
reasonable speed if you have enough of them and a low budget, btw)
//Magnus
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-24 01:28 Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
parent: Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Geoffrey @ 2007-02-24 01:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
Guillaume Smet wrote:
> On 2/23/07, Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net> wrote:
>> As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
>> our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
>
> You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
> to upgrade only to 8 IMHO.
When I said 8, I meant whatever the latest greatest 8 is. Right now,
that looks like 8.2.3.
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-02-24 20:50 Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
parent: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Joshua D. Drake @ 2007-02-24 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
Geoffrey wrote:
> Guillaume Smet wrote:
>> On 2/23/07, Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net> wrote:
>>> As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
>>> our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
>>
>> You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
>> to upgrade only to 8 IMHO.
>
> When I said 8, I meant whatever the latest greatest 8 is. Right now,
> that looks like 8.2.3.
No. The latest version of 8.2 is 8.2.3, there is also 8.1 which is at
8.1.8 and 8.0 which is at 8.0.12.
They are all different *major* releases.
IMO, nobody should be running anything less than 8.1.8.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
@ 2007-03-05 13:23 Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
parent: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Geoffrey @ 2007-03-05 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Geoffrey wrote:
>> Guillaume Smet wrote:
>>> On 2/23/07, Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net> wrote:
>>>> As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
>>>> our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
>>> You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
>>> to upgrade only to 8 IMHO.
>> When I said 8, I meant whatever the latest greatest 8 is. Right now,
>> that looks like 8.2.3.
>
> No. The latest version of 8.2 is 8.2.3, there is also 8.1 which is at
> 8.1.8 and 8.0 which is at 8.0.12.
>
> They are all different *major* releases.
Yes I am aware of the various releases. My bad in that my reference to
'8' was lazy and did not indicate the full release. Our intention is to
move to the latest 8.2.* when we are able.
> IMO, nobody should be running anything less than 8.1.8.
Same old thing, time and money. Too busy bailing the boat to patch it
right now...
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-03-05 13:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-02-23 19:05 which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2007-02-23 19:33 ` Claus Guttesen <kometen@gmail.com>
2007-02-23 19:38 ` Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
2007-02-23 19:53 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2007-02-23 20:01 ` Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
2007-02-24 00:56 ` Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
2007-02-23 21:30 ` Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
2007-02-23 21:33 ` Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2007-02-23 21:33 ` Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
2007-02-23 21:49 ` Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2007-02-23 22:25 ` Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>
2007-02-24 01:28 ` Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2007-02-24 20:50 ` Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
2007-03-05 13:23 ` Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
2007-02-23 22:23 ` Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>
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