From: Shaun Thomas <sthomas@peak6.com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: Claire Chang <yenhsiac@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Postgres 8.4 memory related parameters
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 16:49:28 -0500
Message-ID: <4E3B13E8.7050002@peak6.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E3ACA8C020000250003FB05@gw.wicourts.gov>
References: <1312489633.71838.YahooMailClassic@web31912.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
<4E3ABCFB020000250003FAF4@gw.wicourts.gov>
<4E3B08D3.606@peak6.com>
<4E3ACA8C020000250003FB05@gw.wicourts.gov>
On 08/04/2011 04:36 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Anyway, I'm always willing to take advantage of the benchmarking
> work of others, so I'm very curious about where performance topped
> out for you with HT enabled, and whether disk waits were part of the
> mix.
Hah. Well, it peaked at 2x physical cores, where it ended up being 60%
faster than true cores. It started to fall after that, until I hit 64
concurrent connections and it dropped down to 36% faster. I should also
note that this is with core turbo enabled and performance mode BIOS
settings so it never goes into power saving mode. Without those, our
results were inconsistent, with variance of up to 40% per run, on top of
40% worse performance at concurrency past 2x core count.
I tested along a scale from 1 to 64 concurrent connections at a scale of
100 so it would fit in memory. I was trying to test some new X5675s
cores against our old E7450s. The scary part was that a dual X5675 ended
up being 2.5x faster than a quad E7450 at 24-user concurrency. It's
unreal. It's a great way to save on per-core licensing fees.
We're also on an 8.2 database. We're upgrading soon, I promise. :)
--
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 800 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-676-8870
sthomas@peak6.com
______________________________________________
See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer.php
for terms and conditions related to this email
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: sthomas@peak6.com, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov, yenhsiac@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Postgres 8.4 memory related parameters
In-Reply-To: <4E3B13E8.7050002@peak6.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