On 23/07/15 23:37, domenico febbo wrote:
is the problem also in PostgreSQL 9.4.x?
I'm going to buy a production's server with 4 sockets E7-4850 12 cores
so 12*4 = 48 cores (and 96 threads using HT).
What do you suggest?
Using or not HT?
From my experience 9.4 is considerably better (we are us
On 23 Jul 2015, at 13:37, domenico febbo wrote:
> is the problem also in PostgreSQL 9.4.x?
> I'm going to buy a production's server with 4 sockets E7-4850 12 cores
> so 12*4 = 48 cores (and 96 threads using HT).
>
> What do you suggest?
> Using or not HT?
>
> BR
1. If you have enough money to
is the problem also in PostgreSQL 9.4.x?
I'm going to buy a production's server with 4 sockets E7-4850 12 cores
so 12*4 = 48 cores (and 96 threads using HT).
What do you suggest?
Using or not HT?
BR
Domenico
2015-07-21 11:07 GMT+02:00 Mark Kirkwood :
> On 21/07/15 20:04, David Rowley wrote:
>>
>
On 21/07/15 20:04, David Rowley wrote:
On 21 July 2015 at 14:59, Jeison Bedoya Delgado
mailto:jeis...@audifarma.com.co>> wrote:
hi everyone,
Recently update a database to machine with RHEL7, but i see that the
performance is betther if the hyperthreading tecnology is
deactivated
On 21 July 2015 at 14:59, Jeison Bedoya Delgado
wrote:
> hi everyone,
>
> Recently update a database to machine with RHEL7, but i see that the
> performance is betther if the hyperthreading tecnology is deactivated and
> use only 32 cores.
>
> is normal that the machine performance is better with
