Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Geoffrey wrote:
Guillaume Smet wrote:
On 2/23/07, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
to
Geoffrey wrote:
Guillaume Smet wrote:
On 2/23/07, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
to upgrade only to 8 IMHO.
I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
Anyone point me to a reference?
Is
I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
Anyone point me to a reference?
We
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:05:57PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
AFAIK the cut-off point is at the Woodcrests. They are overall much better
suited to PostgreSQL than the older Xeons
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:05:57PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
AFAIK the cut-off point is at the Woodcrests. They are overall much better
suited to
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 04:53:18PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
It's slightly unfortunate that AMD and Intel cling to the Opteron and Xeon
names even though they're making significant architecture changes, but that's
life, I guess.
AFAIR Intel has been calling their server processors Xeon
Geoffrey,
I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
including AMD and Sparc. It's just *worse* on the PIII and P4
Josh Berkus wrote:
Geoffrey,
I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
including AMD and Sparc. It's just *worse* on
Josh Berkus wrote:
Geoffrey,
I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
including AMD and Sparc. It's just *worse*
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
Geoffrey,
I recall a reference on the list indicating that newer Xeon processors
don't suffer from the context switching problem reported last year.
Just to be clear, it's a software problem which affects all architectures,
including AMD and Sparc.
On 2/23/07, Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also isn't it pretty much *not* a problem with current versions of
PostgreSQL?
We had a really *big* scalability problem with a quad Xeon MP 2.2 and
PostgreSQL 7.4. The problem is mostly gone since we upgraded to 8.1 a
year ago.
Woodcrest
On 2/23/07, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
to upgrade only to 8 IMHO.
--
Guillaume
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:05:57PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
In searching the archives, I can't find any specific info indentifying
which Xeon processors don't have this problem.
AFAIK the cut-off point is at the Woodcrests. They are overall
Guillaume Smet wrote:
On 2/23/07, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've heard. We're headed for 8 as soon as possible, but until we get
our code ready, we're on 7.4.16.
You should move to at least 8.1 and possibly 8.2. It's not a good idea
to upgrade only to 8 IMHO.
When I said 8, I
15 matches
Mail list logo
