Re: Hyper-Trading
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Hyper-Trading |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 11827.1184110448@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Hyper-Trading ("Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej.groups@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Hyper-Trading
|
Список | pgsql-general |
"Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej.groups@gmail.com> writes: > On 7/11/07, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> wrote: >> But notice that hyperthreading imposes its own overhead. I've not >> seen evidence that enabling hyperthreading actually helps, although I >> may have overlooked a couple of cases. > Have a look at these: > http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-htl/ > http://www.2cpu.com/articles/41_6.html Conventional wisdom around here has been that HT doesn't help database performance, and that IBM link might provide a hint as to why: the only item for which they show a large loss in performance is disk I/O. Ooops. Personally I keep HT turned on on my devel machine, because I do find that recompiling Postgres is noticeably faster ("make -j4" rocks on a dual Xeon w/HT). I doubt that's the benchmark of greatest interest to the average *user* of Postgres, though. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: