Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 20:45:33 -0600 From: Craig Boston <craig@tobuj.gank.org> To: "Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> Cc: smp@FreeBSD.org, hackers@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Progress on scaling of FreeBSD on 8 CPU systems Message-ID: <20070302024533.GA64754@nowhere> In-Reply-To: <20070227221252.GD51916@decibel.org> References: <20070224213111.GB41434@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070227182511.GD29041@decibel.org> <20070227205951.GA56651@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070227221252.GD51916@decibel.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 04:12:52PM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 03:59:52PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > > I've mentioned this a couple of times, but postgresql didn't scale > > well [on freebsd at least] when I tried it last year. I hope to > > revisit when I get time. > > Let me know if you need help when you get to that point. Keep in mind > that PostgreSQL's out-of-the-box configuration is pretty conservative, > so you won't get good numbers that way. I was kind of wondering that myself, especially as PostgreSQL uses a multi-process model rather than threads. It seems like it would benefit more from optimization of the Sys-V semaphores and shared memory. Craig
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070302024533.GA64754>