Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([98.129.198.125]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TWpf9-0002Si-8G for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:34:27 +0000 Received: from server13-scl.nuevasync.com ([64.13.138.208] helo=mail.nuevasync.com) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TWpf7-0007y8-6d for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:34:26 +0000 Received: from [192.168.65.253] (unknown [69.51.127.178]) by mail.nuevasync.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78FDC458006 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 07:34:23 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <509D1465.3050500@boreham.org> Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 07:34:13 -0700 From: David Boreham User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: HT on or off for E5-26xx ? References: <5099D5FA.90802@boreham.org> <5099E094.9010703@catalyst.net.nz> <509A631F.2010507@boreham.org> <509AD0AB.5010109@catalyst.net.nz> <509B241C.1080108@boreham.org> <509BBA87.3090400@optionshouse.com> <509BBF47.7090905@boreham.org> In-Reply-To: <509BBF47.7090905@boreham.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201211/117 X-Sequence-Number: 48483 Here are the SELECT only pgbench test results from my E5-2620 machine, with HT on and off: HT off: bash-4.1$ /usr/pgsql-9.2/bin/pgbench -T 600 -j 48 -c 48 -S starting vacuum...end. transaction type: SELECT only scaling factor: 100 query mode: simple number of clients: 48 number of threads: 48 duration: 600 s number of transactions actually processed: 25969680 tps = 43281.392273 (including connections establishing) tps = 43282.476955 (excluding connections establishing) All 6 cores saturated: avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 81.42 0.00 18.21 0.00 0.00 0.37 HT on: bash-4.1$ /usr/pgsql-9.2/bin/pgbench -T 600 -j 48 -c 48 -S starting vacuum...end. transaction type: SELECT only scaling factor: 100 query mode: simple number of clients: 48 number of threads: 48 duration: 600 s number of transactions actually processed: 29934601 tps = 49888.697225 (including connections establishing) tps = 49889.570754 (excluding connections establishing) 12% of CPU showing as idle (whether that's true or not I'm not sure): avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 71.09 0.00 16.99 0.00 0.00 11.92 So for this particular test HT gives us the equivalent of about one extra core. It does not reduce performance, rather increases performance slightly.