Hi Matthew,
You should be upgrade to Pg 8.2.5.
We did test on different hardware. The bigest step is to use Pg 8.2.5.
The high number of context switches which we saw before simple disappeared.
In regards to you question about XEONs: You will have the similar issue
with a XEON box.
We tried different boxes (4-way DC, 8-way, 8-way DC and 4-way QC).
The improvement compared with a 4-way SC wan't really better under Pg
8.0. I'm not saying that a 4-way SC is faster than the 4-way QC in terms
of handling more concurrent queries. But there was never a huge step as
you would expect from the spend money.
Regards
Sven.
Matthew Lunnon schrieb:
> Hi Sven,
>
> Does this mean that one option I have is to use a multi core Intel based
> server instead of an AMD based server?
>
> Matthew
>
> Sven Geisler wrote:
>> Hi Matthew,
>>
>> I remember that I also an issue with AMD Opterons before Pg 8.1
>> There is a specific Opteron behaviour on shared memory locks which adds
>> a extra "penalty" during the execution time for Pg code before 8.1.
>> I can you provide my patch for Pg 8.0 which should be adaptable for Pg
>> 7.4 if you can compile PostgreSQL.
>>
>> But if you can upgrade you should upgrade to Pg 8.2.5 64-bit. The scale
>> up for your concurrent queries will be great.
>>
>> Sven.
>>
>> Matthew Lunnon schrieb:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have a 4 * dual core 64bit AMD OPTERON server with 16G of RAM, running
>>> postgres 7.4.3. This has been recompiled on the server for 64 stored
>>> procedure parameters, (I assume this makes postgres 64 bit but are not
>>> sure). When the server gets under load from database connections
>>> executing reads, lets say 20 - 40 concurrent reads, the CPU's seem to
>>> limit at about 30-35% usage with no iowait reported. If I run a simple
>>> select at this time it takes 5 seconds, the same query runs in 300
>>> millis when the server is not under load so it seems that the database
>>> is not performing well even though there is plenty of spare CPU. There
>>> does not appear to be large amounts of disk IO and my database is about
>>> 5.5G so this should fit comfortably in RAM.
>>>
>>> changes to postgresql.sql:
>>>
>>> max_connections = 500
>>> shared_buffers = 96000
>>> sort_mem = 10240
>>> effective_cache_size = 1000000
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any ideas what my bottle neck might be and what I can
>>> do about it?
>>>
>>> Thanks for any help.
>>>
>>> Matthew.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Matthew Lunnon
> Technical Consultant
> RWA Ltd.
>
> mlunnon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Tel: +44 (0)29 2081 5056
> www.rwa-net.co.uk
> --
>
--
Sven Geisler <sgeisler@xxxxxxxxxx> Tel +49.30.921017.81 Fax .50
Senior Developer, AEC/communications GmbH & Co. KG Berlin, Germany
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
