Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ADDE6332AF for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:17:24 -0400 (AST) 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 25429-08 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:17:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25D61632E08 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:17:13 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-96-244-14-10.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [96.244.14.10]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Mg2HB-1NI9gG3x6D-00NZZQ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:17:11 +0100 Message-ID: <4B4BB174.6020608@2ndquadrant.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:17:08 -0500 From: Greg Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Marlowe CC: Bob Dusek , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: performance config help References: <61039b861001110544o2c352763q13dcf9d78a156714@mail.gmail.com> <61039b861001110842g15bb1f26jc50b6e6762e01427@mail.gmail.com> <61039b861001110949n699f0bd1pf3c878fa4c739891@mail.gmail.com> <4B4BA058.4070703@2ndquadrant.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19823bjcjd9/UTd3FO40qDEa57SdC+BMYPAVNn +sRbjuixvA7ND8fDfMju0OVnkqCEvE6Oa0zWDBnwi0e3mPiscu o5/l2r9MWNWOX3Pl0kVIeioFpP8z4vh X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.435 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=0.164, BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201001/228 X-Sequence-Number: 37108 Scott Marlowe wrote: > The DDR3 Nehalem and DDR2 AMD are both actually pretty close in real > world use on 4 or more socket machines. Most benchmarks on memory > bandwidth give no huge advantage to either one or the other. They > both max out at about 25GB/s. > The most fair comparison I've seen so far is http://www.advancedclustering.com/company-blog/stream-benchmarking.html which puts the faster Intel solutions at 37GB/s, while the Opterons bog down at 20GB/s. That matches my own tests pretty well too--Intel's got at least a 50% lead here in many cases. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com