On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 07:16:18PM +0100, Matt Clark wrote:
> >
> >Hyperthreading is actually an excellent architectural feature that
> >can give significant performance gains when implemented well and used
> >for an appropriate workload under a decently HT aware OS.
> >
> >IMO, typical RDBMS strea
Hyperthreading is actually an excellent architectural feature that
can give significant performance gains when implemented well and used
for an appropriate workload under a decently HT aware OS.
IMO, typical RDBMS streams are not an obviously appropriate workload,
Intel didn't implement it partic
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 03:07:00PM +0100, Matt Clark wrote:
> You turn it off in the BIOS. There is no 'other half', the processor is
> just pretending to have two cores by shuffling registers around, which
> gives maybe a 5-10% performance gain in certain multithreaded
> situations.
> A ha
How would I turn that off? In the kernel config? Not too familiar with
that. I have a 2 proc xeon with 4 gigs of mem on the way for postgres,
so I hope HT isn't a problem. If HT is turned off, does it just not
use the other "half" of the processor? Or does the processor just work
as one unit?
Y
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:23:24 -0700, Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There have been issues with Postgres+HT, especially on Linux 2.4. Try
> turning HT off if other tuning doesn't solve things.
>
> Otherwise, see:
> http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/perf.html
How would
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:35:31 -0400, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suspect that fooling with shared_buffers is entirely the wrong tree
> for you to be barking up. My suggestion is to be looking at individual
> queries that are slow, and seeing how to speed those up. This might
> involve
JJosh,
> I'm trying to figure out what I need to do to get my postgres server
> moving faster. It's just crawling right now. It's on a p4 HT with 2
> gigs of mem.
There have been issues with Postgres+HT, especially on Linux 2.4. Try
turning HT off if other tuning doesn't solve things.
Otherwi
Josh Close <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to figure out what I need to do to get my postgres server
> moving faster. It's just crawling right now.
I suspect that fooling with shared_buffers is entirely the wrong tree
for you to be barking up. My suggestion is to be looking at individual
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 01:33:16 +0100, Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and using what version of PostgreSQL are you using? 8.0beta, I hope?
I'm using version 7.4.5.
> > I was thinking I need to increase the amount of shared buffers, but
> > I've been told "the sweet spot for shared_buff
>Josh Close
> I'm trying to figure out what I need to do to get my postgres server
> moving faster. It's just crawling right now. It's on a p4 HT with 2
> gigs of mem.
and using what version of PostgreSQL are you using? 8.0beta, I hope?
> I was thinking I need to increase the amount of shared
10 matches
Mail list logo
