Le Vendredi 25 Novembre 2005 16:20, Tom Lane a écrit : > Qingqing Zhou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 that what you're looking for ? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ egrep "(model name|MHz)" /proc/cpuinfo model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 250 cpu MHz : 2391.040 model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 250 cpu MHz : 2391.040 $ cat /etc/mandrake-release Mandrakelinux release 10.1 (Community) for x86_64 I can try to backport Postgresql 8.1.0 rpms from developement tree on mandriva 10.1, install and run some test if you're really interested.
pgp5c7p3RCE4k.pgp
Description: PGP signature
