| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison |
| Date: | 2008-02-25 20:05:24 |
| Message-ID: | 20080225120524.4911ce08@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:36:56 -0800
Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
>
> If there is any significant I/O latency for a single backend, it seems
> like a context switch could be a win for processor utilization. It
> might not be a win overall, but at least potentially a win.
Do we want a 20% potential win or an 80% potential win?
I would personally rather keep it simple, hard core, and data shoving
as possible without any issue with scheduling etc..
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
- --
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHwx+EATb/zqfZUUQRAvOgAJ4vWCO74XzXy9Pbzqz3otWoqKI3HgCfRwUI
ZLd0SOgf5jnInZvOxCS+iNU=
=Syk1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-25 20:08:29 | Re: [PATCHES] Avahi support for Postgresql |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2008-02-25 19:58:18 | Re: Tuning 8.3 |