From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... |
Date: | 2003-03-06 04:19:16 |
Message-ID: | 12400.1046924356@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-performance |
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved...
I looked into this more. AFAICT, the scenario in which kqueue is
said to be faster involves watching a large number of file
descriptors simultaneously. Since libpq is only watching one
descriptor, I don't see the benefit of adopting kqueue ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-06 04:33:36 | Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-03-06 03:47:51 | Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-06 04:33:36 | Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-03-06 03:47:51 | Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... |