Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1470633B89 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:40:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 82600-08 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:40:03 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com (brmea-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.98.31]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68BCD633493 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:40:07 -0300 (ADT) Received: from fe-amer-10.sun.com ([192.18.109.80]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2FKe6Tm004715 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:40:06 GMT MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KGK00B00EGGNZ00@mail-amer.sun.com> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:40:06 -0600 (MDT) Received: from Macintosh-8.home ([unknown] [96.237.55.23]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KGK007XPEQTWD10@mail-amer.sun.com>; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:40:05 -0600 (MDT) Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 16:40:04 -0400 From: "Jignesh K. Shah" Subject: Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4 In-reply-to: <1E9C2E4B-4C0C-4343-B244-388DA2047870@decibel.org> To: decibel Cc: Tom Lane , Scott Carey , Kevin Grittner , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Message-id: <49BD67A4.7020106@sun.com> References: <29836.1236826066@sss.pgh.pa.us> <49B8861C.2000005@sun.com> <1E9C2E4B-4C0C-4343-B244-388DA2047870@decibel.org> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200903/200 X-Sequence-Number: 33122 decibel wrote: > On Mar 11, 2009, at 10:48 PM, Jignesh K. Shah wrote: >> Fair enough.. Well I am now appealing to all who has a fairly >> decent sized hardware want to try it out and see whether there are >> "gains", "no-changes" or "regressions" based on your workload. Also >> it will help if you report number of cpus when you respond back to >> help collect feedback. > > > Do you have a self-contained test case? I have several boxes with > 16-cores worth of Xeon with 96GB I could try it on (though you might > not care about having "only" 16 cores :P) I dont have authority over iGen, but I am pretty sure that with sysbench we should be able to recreate the test case or even dbt-2 That said the patch should be pretty easy to apply to your own workloads (where more feedback is more appreciated ).. On x64 16 cores might bring out the problem faster too since typically they are 2.5X higher clock frequency.. Try it out.. stock build vs patched builds. -Jignesh -- Jignesh Shah http://blogs.sun.com/jkshah The New Sun Microsystems,Inc http://sun.com/postgresql