From: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Query Priority |
Date: | 2003-05-02 14:05:44 |
Message-ID: | 20030502140543.GA13419@libertyrms.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 01:55:01PM +0100, Peter Childs wrote:
> Is there some way to give some postgres backends higher priority.
> Hence on a very busy server "important" queries get done faster than less
> priority that unimportant queries.
No.
> I don't think this would be too difficult to do as certainly on
> Linux the process could just be reniced and the os left to figure it out.
> of course any query that is holding up another query with locks needs to
> get done quickly.
It's the latter condition that causes the problem for the nice-ing
(among other things -- there's plenty of discussion about this in the
archives. Tom Lane gave a quite long explanation one time, but I
can't find it right now.)
> I find my self with a database thats slowed to a craw because of a
> slow batch program it not letting the gui clients the speed they require
> to be usable.
Sounds like what you really need is a replica database which you can
use for batch reports, &c. You could do this with a small-ish box,
because you'd only have one client.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-02 14:23:10 | Re: Query Priority |
Previous Message | Peter Childs | 2003-05-02 12:55:01 | Query Priority |