On 2014-08-21 14:02:26 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 08/20/2014 07:40 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Not sure how you can make such a blanket statement when so many people > > have tested and shown the benefits of hyper-threading. > > Actually, I don't know that anyone has posted the benefits of HT. > Link? There's definitely cases where it can help. But it's highly workload *and* hardware dependent. > OS is RHEL with 2.6.32-431.3.1.el6.x86_64. > > I've emailed a kernel hacker who works at Intel for comment; for one > thing, I'm wondering if the older kernel version is a problem for a > system like this. I'm not sure if it has been backported by redhat, but there definitely have been significant improvement in SMT aware scheduling after vanilla 2.6.32. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
