From: Scott Carey <scott@richrelevance.com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
To: Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:54:01 -0700
Message-ID: <C5DFDDB9.341B%scott@richrelevance.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49BA3BA2.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov>
On 3/13/09 8:55 AM, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
>>> "Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM> wrote:
> usr sys wt idl sze
> 38 11 0 50 64
The fact that you're maxing out at 50% CPU utilization has me
wondering -- are there really 64 CPUs here, or are there 32 CPUs with
"hyperthreading" technology (or something conceptually similar)?
-Kevin
Its a sun T1000 or T2000 type box, which are 4 threads per processor core IIRC. Its in his first post:
"
UltraSPARC T2 based 1 socket (64 threads) and 2 socket (128 threads)
servers that Sun sells.
"
These processors use an in-order execution engine and fill the bubbles in the pipelines with SMT (the non-marketing name for hyperthreading).
They are rather efficient at it though, moreso than Intel's first stab at it. And Intel's next generation chips hitting the streets in servers in less than a month, have it again.
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: scott@richrelevance.com, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov, J.K.Shah@Sun.COM
Subject: Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4
In-Reply-To: <C5DFDDB9.341B%scott@richrelevance.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