Re: Linux v.s. Mac OS-X Performance
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Linux v.s. Mac OS-X Performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.64.0711300030470.19500@westnet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Linux v.s. Mac OS-X Performance (Wes <wespvp@msg.bt.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Wes wrote: > Perhaps PostgreSQL isn't heavily threaded enough to make a difference PostgreSQL doesn't use threads at all; it forks processes. See 1.14 in http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_DEV.html > The benchmark that got us looking at this was a MySQL benchmark showing > performance scaling by number of threads on various linux operating > systems. Presumably you mean this one: http://ozlabs.org/~anton/linux/sysbench/ The threading/malloc issues in MySQL are so awful that similar approaches have already been suggested for other operating systems. Check out http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/mysql_perf_tune.html for comments about this under Solaris for example. The fact that PostgreSQL scalability doesn't fall off like this suggests it doesn't have this particular issue. Note that the curve in that sysbench run is awfully similar to the MySQL results at http://tweakers.net/reviews/649/7 (just shifted to the right because there are many more cores in that system). Then look at their PostgreSQL results running the same test. Forgive the error where they state "PostgreSQL might be called a textbook example of a good implementation of multithreading"; it's actually a good multi-process implementation. Interestingly, those results are from a Solaris system. It's good to know about the Google perftools allocator, as there are plenty of client applications that could benefit as yours has from this technique (like the multi-threaded C++ apps it appears aimed at). I just wouldn't expect it to be a big win for the PostgreSQL server itself. -- * Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: