Re: Prioritizing queries

From: Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com>
To: pgsql General List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Prioritizing queries
Date: 2004-09-21 21:04:26
Message-ID: 20040921210426.GB28826@gp.word-to-the-wise.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 04:24:21PM -0400, Christopher Petrilli wrote:
> Has anyone investigated having either high, or low urgency queries? A
> system I'm working on has a constant inflow of data, which has some
> queries gainst it which might require long sequential scans. I'm not
> that worried about how long those queries take, just that they don't
> interfere with other insertions.
>
> This is a bit DSSish, I guess, but I would think it could be managed
> by nicing processes?

I'd like this feature on some boxes that are being pushed a bit too
close to the limit for comfort.

I've played around with some of the crude ways of doing it. Disk I/O
tends to be the resource that's limited, and process niceness won't
affect that. You'd need to do something like explicitly do a nanosleep
for every X blocks read in by a query or somesuch. Perhaps a
generalization of the vacuum-sleep hack.

Cheers,
Steve

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Murphy 2004-09-21 21:07:03 Re: the current scoop on ilike and indexes
Previous Message Thomas F.O'Connell 2004-09-21 20:52:26 Re: the current scoop on ilike and indexes