From: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
To: William Yu <wyu@talisys.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: ok you all win what is best opteron (I dont want a hosed system
Date: 15 May 2005 15:36:10 -0400
Message-ID: <871x8846z9.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d66601$30l6$1@news.hub.org>
References: <4285403A.50206@bigpond.net.au>
<00e201c558b1$730ffb10$797ba8c0@jfradkin>
<d66601$30l6$1@news.hub.org>
William Yu <wyu@talisys.com> writes:
> It turns out the latency in a 2xDC setup is just so much lower and most apps
> like lower latency than higher bandwidth.
You haven't tested anything about "most apps". You tested what the SpecFoo
apps prefer. If you're curious about which Postgres prefers you'll have to
test with Postgres.
I'm not sure whether it will change the conclusion but I expect Postgres will
like bandwidth better than random benchmarks do.
--
greg
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: gsstark@mit.edu, wyu@talisys.com
Subject: Re: ok you all win what is best opteron (I dont want a hosed system
In-Reply-To: <871x8846z9.fsf@stark.xeocode.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