| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Nick Barr <nicky(at)chuckie(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: go for a script! / ex: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |
| Date: | 2003-10-14 00:11:55 |
| Message-ID: | 3816.1066090315@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org> writes:
> Every few months one of the uber core BSD hackers threatens to rewrite
> that part of PG because high up in the BSD camp, it's common belief
> that shm* is a source of performance loss for PostgreSQL.
They're full of it. RAM is RAM, no? Once you've got the memory mapped
into your address space, it's hard to believe that it matters how you
got hold of it.
In any case, mmap doesn't have the semantics we need. See past
discussions.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-14 00:38:27 | Re: int1? |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2003-10-13 23:58:36 | Re: go for a script! / ex: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-10-14 00:20:40 | Re: ways to force index use? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-14 00:01:55 | Re: ways to force index use? |