8 ms·

This is from 2012: http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2012/04/did-i-say-32-cores-how-about-64.html http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2012/04/did-i-say-32-cores-how-abo... My g

This is from 2012: http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2012/04/did-i-say-32-cores-how-about-64.html http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2012/04/did-i-say-32-cores-how-abo... My guess is the 1 socket options scales great. 2 sockets are are less than ideal, and you will not double the 1 socket performance.

mozumder 10y ago
I'd like to see this data on Postgres scaling updated, with more info on the write scaling as well. (the chart appears to be for SELECT queries only)
- brianwawok 10y ago
  The other change is now a single select can use multiple cores, so you could see how that scaled to 32, 64, 128 cores...
  - qaq 10y ago
    On highly concurrent PG systems by when using parallel queries you are sacrificing throughput for better latency. You really don't want to use more than a fairly small number of workers per single select.
- qaq 10y ago
  Outside of some very exotic scenarios you are IOPS bound on writes and not CPU bound.
  - mozumder 10y ago
    Is that still a problem with cheap NVMe drives that can do 500k IOPS?
    - Tostino 10y ago
      Not a problem at all if you provision your server properly so you aren't IOPS bound, though there are plenty of databases which simply won't fit on NVMe drives, so in those cases, yes it could still be a problem.
    - user5994461 10y ago
      Not likely to be a problem if you have FusionIO drives. Likely to be a problem sooner or later on everything else. A definitive recurrent issues on all cloud providers and NAS/network drives.
    - qaq 10y ago
      Nope but everyone is running in the "cloud" and there you are lucky to get 50K IOPS
      - mozumder 10y ago
        This is one of the reasons I don't run in the cloud.
        qaq 10y ago
        same here
Tostino 10y ago
Yeah, every single release since then has had work done on scaling Postgres up on a single machine. They have been working on eliminating bottlenecks one after another to allow it to scale on crazy numbers of cores. I've seen benchmarks on the -hackers mailing list with 88 core Intel servers (4s 22c) in regard to eliminating bottlenecks when you have that many cores. So even if it's not 100% there yet, it will be soon.
anarazel 10y ago
I've seen decent enough scaling on 8 socket servers. There's still some bottlenecks if you have a lot of very short queries (because there's some shared state manipulations per query & transaction), but in a lot of cases postgres scales quite well even at those sizes.

mozumder 10y ago

I'd like to see this data on Postgres scaling updated, with more info on the write scaling as well. (the chart appears to be for SELECT queries only)

brianwawok 10y ago
The other change is now a single select can use multiple cores, so you could see how that scaled to 32, 64, 128 cores...
- qaq 10y ago
  On highly concurrent PG systems by when using parallel queries you are sacrificing throughput for better latency. You really don't want to use more than a fairly small number of workers per single select.
qaq 10y ago
Outside of some very exotic scenarios you are IOPS bound on writes and not CPU bound.
- mozumder 10y ago
  Is that still a problem with cheap NVMe drives that can do 500k IOPS?
  - Tostino 10y ago
    Not a problem at all if you provision your server properly so you aren't IOPS bound, though there are plenty of databases which simply won't fit on NVMe drives, so in those cases, yes it could still be a problem.
  - user5994461 10y ago
    Not likely to be a problem if you have FusionIO drives. Likely to be a problem sooner or later on everything else. A definitive recurrent issues on all cloud providers and NAS/network drives.
  - qaq 10y ago
    Nope but everyone is running in the "cloud" and there you are lucky to get 50K IOPS
    - mozumder 10y ago
      This is one of the reasons I don't run in the cloud.
      - qaq 10y ago
        same here

Tostino 10y ago

Yeah, every single release since then has had work done on scaling Postgres up on a single machine. They have been working on eliminating bottlenecks one after another to allow it to scale on crazy numbers of cores. I've seen benchmarks on the -hackers mailing list with 88 core Intel servers (4s 22c) in regard to eliminating bottlenecks when you have that many cores. So even if it's not 100% there yet, it will be soon.

anarazel 10y ago

I've seen decent enough scaling on 8 socket servers. There's still some bottlenecks if you have a lot of very short queries (because there's some shared state manipulations per query & transaction), but in a lot of cases postgres scales quite well even at those sizes.