On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 09:28, Jeff wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:13:19 -0500
> "Chris Field" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > we are looking at Xeon, We are currently running it on a quad sun v880
> > compiled to be 64bit and have been getting dreadful performance. I
> > don't think we really ha
ECTED]>
> To: "PgSQL Performance ML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 8:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Value of Quad vs. Dual Processor machine
>
>
> > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 17:32, Chris Field wrote:
> > > We are getting ready to s
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:13:19 -0500
"Chris Field" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> we are looking at Xeon, We are currently running it on a quad sun v880
> compiled to be 64bit and have been getting dreadful performance. I
> don't think we really have much to gain from going 64bit.
>
>
By chance, ar
Fred Moyer wrote:
One thing I learned after spending about a week comparing the Athlon (2
ghz, 333 mhz frontside bus) and Xeon (2.4 ghz, 266 mhz frontside bus)
platforms was that on average the select queries I was benchmarking ran
30% faster on the Athlon (this was with data cached in memory so ma
buy it if possible.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Field
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 6:13 PM
To: Ron Johnson; PgSQL Performance ML
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Value of Quad vs. Dual Processor machine
we are looking at Xeon, We are
"PgSQL Performance ML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Value of Quad vs. Dual Processor machine
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 17:32, Chris Field wrote:
> > We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 17:32, Chris Field wrote:
> We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
> the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
> how postgres in not a threaded application, and this server will only be
> used for log/transaction ana
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 18:32, Chris Field wrote:
>> > We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
>> > the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
>> > how postgres in not a threaded application, and
On 2003-11-11T17:40:14-0700, scott.marlowe wrote:
> 2 CPUs should be plenty.
for everyone? No, I must have been thinking of someone else :-)
/Allan
--
Allan Wind
P.O. Box 2022
Woburn, MA 01888-0022
USA
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 18:32, Chris Field wrote:
> > We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
> > the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
> > how postgres in not a threaded application, and this se
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 18:32, Chris Field wrote:
> We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
> the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
> how postgres in not a threaded application, and this server will only be
> used for log/transaction ana
We are getting ready to spec out a new machine and are wondering about
the wisdom of buying a quad versus a dual processor machine. Seing as
how postgres in not a threaded application, and this server will only be
used for log/transaction analysis (it will only ever have a few large
queries runnin
12 matches
Mail list logo
