From: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
---|---|
To: | hs(at)cybertec(dot)at |
Cc: | PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Threaded Sorting |
Date: | 2002-10-04 14:22:00 |
Message-ID: | 1033741323.12986.31.camel@mouse.copelandconsulting.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wouldn't hold your breath for any form of threading. Since PostgreSQL
is process based, you might consider having a pool of sort processes
which address this but I doubt you'll get anywhere talking about threads
here.
Greg
On Fri, 2002-10-04 at 02:46, Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote:
> Did anybody think about threaded sorting so far?
> Assume an SMP machine. In the case of building an index or in the case
> of sorting a lot of data there is just one backend working. Therefore
> just one CPU is used.
> What about starting a thread for every temporary file being created?
> This way CREATE INDEX could use many CPUs.
> Maybe this is worth thinking about because it will speed up huge
> databases and enterprise level computing.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Hans-Jürgen Schönig
>
> --
> *Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig*
> Ludo-Hartmannplatz 1/14, A-1160 Vienna, Austria
> Tel: +43/1/913 68 09; +43/664/233 90 75
> www.postgresql.at <http://www.postgresql.at>, cluster.postgresql.at
> <http://cluster.postgresql.at>, www.cybertec.at
> <http://www.cybertec.at>, kernel.cybertec.at <http://kernel.cybertec.at>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hans-Jürgen Schönig | 2002-10-04 14:40:37 | Re: Threaded Sorting |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-04 13:54:42 | Re: [SQL] [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |