On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Darcy Buskermolen wrote: > I'm still seeing differences in the planner estimates, have you run a VACUUM > ANALYZE prior to running these tests? > I did. I shall retry that.. but the numbers (the cost estimates) are pretty close on both. the actual times are very different.
> Also, are the disk subsystems in these 2 systems the same? You may be seeing > some discrepancies in things spindle speed, U160 vs U320, throughput on > specific RAID controlers, different blocksize, ect. > As I said in my first email IO isn't the problem here - the data set is small enough that it is all cached (~10MB). iostat reports 0 activity on the disks on both the sun and p2. and I just ran teh test again with 40 clients: 730s for hte p2, 1100 for the sun. (0% idle on both of them, no IO). I think the next I may try is recompiling with a newer gcc. -- Jeff Trout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.jefftrout.com/ http://www.stuarthamm.net/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
