On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > FYI, on an 8 or 16 core machine, 10k to 30k context switches per > second aren't that much. If you're climbing past 100k you might want > to look out. > > The more I read up on the 74xx CPUs and look at the numbers here the > more I think it's just that this machine has X bandwidth and it's > using it all up. You could put 1,000 cores in it, and it wouldn't go > any faster. My guess is that a 4x6 core AMD machine or even a 2x6 > Nehalem would be much faster at this job. Only way to tell is to run > something like the stream benchmark and see how it scales, > memory-wise, as you add cores to the benchmark. Also I'm guessing that query profiling may help, if we can get the queries to request less data to trundle through then we might be able to get Bob the performance needed to keep up. But at some point he's gonna have to look at partitioning his database onto multiple machines some how. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
