Re: SMP scaling

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mark Rae <mrae(at)purplebat(dot)com>, postgres list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SMP scaling
Date: 2005-03-18 18:19:06
Message-ID: 9191.1111169946@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> So it seems our entire SMP problem was that global lock. Nice.

Yeah, I was kind of expecting to see the LockMgrLock up next, but
it seems we're still a ways away from having a problem there. I guess
that's because we only tend to touch locks once per query, whereas
we're grabbing and releasing buffers much more.

From the relatively small absolute value of Mark's queries/sec numbers,
I suppose he is testing some fairly heavyweight queries (big enough
to not emphasize per-query overhead). I wonder what the numbers would
look like with very small, simple queries. It'd move the stress around
for sure ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-03-18 18:31:51 Re: SMP scaling
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-03-18 18:11:10 Re: SMP scaling