| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Process wakeups when idle and power consumption |
| Date: | 2011-05-10 16:20:10 |
| Message-ID: | 17842.1305044410@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I've got a feeling that things will go easier if we have a separate
> connection for the feedback channel.
> Yes, two connections, one in either direction.
> That would make everything simple, nice one way connections. It would
> also mean we could stream at higher data rates.
The above sounds like complete nonsense. TCP connections are already
full-duplex.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-05-10 16:43:06 | Re: Process wakeups when idle and power consumption |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-05-10 16:17:44 | Re: the big picture for index-only scans |