pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shaun Thomas <sthomas@optionshouse.com>
To: Craig James <cjames@emolecules.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically different performance)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:52:37 -0500
Message-ID: <50756F95.7040006@optionshouse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFwQ8re9O2Nvao3UsUxDxFZZUsoSqNJSC4jaKGB9cJ7_YyjoBA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFwQ8revW5Ez6uCUqPeUFVHh0pdy0OZKv8_nM0SvxHgTM055EQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFwQ8re9O2Nvao3UsUxDxFZZUsoSqNJSC4jaKGB9cJ7_YyjoBA@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/09/2012 06:30 PM, Craig James wrote:

>                ra:8192 walb:1M   ra:256 walb:1M    ra:256 walb:256kB
>                ----------------  ----------------  -----------------
> -c  -t        Run1  Run2  Run3  Run4  Run5  Run6  Run7  Run8  Run9
> 40  2500      4261  3722  4243  9286  9240  5712  9310  8530  8872
> 50  2000      4138  4399  3865  9213  9351  9578  8011  7651  8362

I think I speak for more than a few people here when I say: wat.

About the only thing I can ask, is: did you make these tests fair? And 
by fair, I mean:

echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
pg_ctl -D /your/pg/dir restart

Between every test to make sure shared buffers and the OS inode cache 
was empty before the start of each test? If you're using that bash-style 
for-loop you attached earlier, probably not. Still though, I don't think 
that would account for this much variance between having read-ahead at 
8M as opposed to 256kb.

My head hurts.

-- 
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-444-8534
sthomas@optionshouse.com

______________________________________________

See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email




view thread (11+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <50756F95.7040006@optionshouse.com>
Permalink:  ../50756F95.7040006@optionshouse.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/50756F95.7040006@optionshouse.com

 · 

reply

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@optionshouse.com, cjames@emolecules.com
  Subject: Re: Hyperthreading (was: Two identical systems, radically different performance)
  In-Reply-To: <50756F95.7040006@optionshouse.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