X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C88B55284A for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:29:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 92472-07 for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:29:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mx1.neopolitan.us (mx1.neopolitan.us [65.87.16.224]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B84345288D for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:29:16 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [64.173.27.113] (HELO [192.168.2.45]) by mx1.neopolitan.us (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 10180932 for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 08:29:15 -0700 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.1.0.040913 Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 08:29:15 -0700 Subject: Re: Performance problems on 4/8way Opteron (dualcore) From: "J. Andrew Rogers" To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.312 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200507/501 X-Sequence-Number: 13742 On 7/30/05 12:57 AM, "William Yu" wrote: > I haven't investigated the 2.6.12+ kernel updates yet -- I probably will > do our development servers first to give it a test. The kernel updates make the NUMA code dual-core aware, which apparently makes a big difference in some cases but not in others. It makes some sense, since multi-processor multi-core machines will have two different types of non-locality instead of just one that need to be managed. Prior to the v2.6.12 patches, a dual-core dual-proc machine was viewed as a quad-proc machine. The closest thing to a supported v2.6.12 kernel that I know of is FC4, which is not really supported in the enterprise sense of course. J. Andrew Rogers