| From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Brian E Gallew <geek+(at)cmu(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Threads |
| Date: | 1999-08-04 14:26:07 |
| Message-ID: | 37A84D7F.B8C58D0A@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Redirection will end up costing us a whole 'nother TCP connection
> build/destroy which can be disregarded for non-trivial queries, but
> still may prove too much (depending upon query patterns). On the
> other hand, it would probably be easier to code and have better
> throughput than funneling all data through the postmaster. On the
> gripping hand, a postmaster that mediated all transactions could also
> implement QoS style controls, or throttle connections taking an unfair
> share of the available bandwidth.
> In any event, this could also be the start of a naming service. It
> should be relatively easy, with either method, to have the postmaster
> handle connections to databases (not just tables, mind you) on other
> machines.
Starting to sound suspiciously like the Corba work I've been doing on
my day job.
We're using ACE/TAO for it's realtime and QoS features, but other
implementations are probably much lower footprint wrt installation and
use. I suppose we'd want a C implementation; the ones I've been using
are all C++...
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adriaan Joubert | 1999-08-04 14:49:47 | Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: btree scan list trashed ?? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-08-04 14:08:00 | Re: [HACKERS] Threads |