Re: gprof SELECT COUNT(*) results

["Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 10:20:11AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> writes:
> > I can see your computer is really slow, so my theory is that since it is
> > easy to hold a running-slowly horse than a fast one, so my spinlock on a
> > 2.4G modern machine should takes relatively longer time to get effective.
> > Just kidding.
> 
> Is that "modern machine" a Xeon by any chance?  We know that Xeons have
> fairly awful concurrent performance, and the long latency for bus lock
> instructions may well be the reason why.  FWIW, the numbers I showed
> last night were for an HPPA machine, which I used just because I chanced
> to have CVS tip already built for profiling on it.  I've since
> reproduced the test on a spiffy new dual Xeon that Red Hat just bought
> me :-) ... and I get similar numbers to yours.  It'd be interesting to
> see the results from an SMP Opteron, if anyone's got one handy.

Is there still interest in this? I've got a dual Opteron running FBSD.
(What would be the profiler to use on FBSD?)
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461