Re: Committing Resources to Win32

Using completion ports assumes your app is threaded in the first
instance, doesn't it?

Unless I am mistaken, at the moment
. we don't have a server app at all
. our code base does not currently support threading, and we want to
keep to a single code base
- corollary: we don't know if supporting POSIX threads and Windows
threads in a single code base is possible or sensible
. we don't know of any OpenSource tools that support compiling threaded
apps with TLS on Windows (specifically, MinGW does not, apparently)

So I suspect we are a very long way from being able to use Completion Ports.

cheers

andrew

Jim Jones wrote:

>If you guys have already discussed the following possibilities, I
>apologize. I joined the list late.
>
>The correct way to create a high performance server on the Windows
>platform (NT, Advanced Server, etc) is to utilize IO Completion Ports.
>The kernel will manage your connection pool and threading for you. Any
>object that is serializable can utilize this model (sockets, files,
>etc).
>
>If one thread becomes busy with processing, a second worker thread is
>awoken, and it performs the processing. Sockets and threads are all
>preallocated to increase performance.
>
>Here are a couple informative articles on the subject :
>
>Writing scalable server applications using IOCP
>http://www.codeproject.com/internet/iocp.asp
>
>Developing a Truly Scalable Winsock Server using IO Completion Ports
>http://www.codeproject.com/internet/winsockiocp.asp
>
>The Microsoft SDK comes with a free compiler, but you will have access
>to only the API functions, none of the frameworks (MFC, ATL, etc).
>
>Jim
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: pgsql-hackers-win32-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
>[mailto:pgsql-hackers-win32-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Joshua D.
>Drake
>Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 4:57 PM
>To: Andrew Dunstan
>Cc: pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org
>Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Committing Resources to Win32
>
>
>
>
>>*nod*
>>
>>Joshua, can you tell us any more about the nature of your client's
>>app(s)? Speculating like this in the dark is a bit fruitless.
>>
>>
>>
>I can't legally tell you much but what I can tell you is:
>
>There application creates a great deal of processes that open and close.
>
>
>On Linux which has a very light process model the performance hit is
>nominal. On platforms like Win32 or Solaris where processes are
>expensive, under heavy load you can see a pretty significant increase in
>
>performance by going to a threaded model.
>
>They are currently running our Cygwin installation which combined with
>connection pooling has provided "ok" performance but nothing
>worth writing home about (especially considering they compared against
>Linux).
>
>I am not going to lie, from a Windows perspective I am a little bit of a
>
>PHB. I don't develop (personally) on Windows. However the
>customer requirements are simple:
>
>Command Prompt needs to provide a native Win32 PostgreSQL version that
>supplies a reasonable proximity of performance
>per the Linux native version. The Win32 native version must also
>maintain the same level of transactibility as the Linux version.
>
>My customer is a house of Windows C/C++ and they are telling me that
>using CreateProcess will not generate that proximity.
>
>They and I could be totally on crack, but my own research suggests
>pretty much the same thing and the Windows programmers
>that I have talked to that are not associated with this customer also
>say the same thing.
>
>What this all comes down to for us is this:
>
>Can we (the community) develop a Win32 native version using
>CreateProcess that will scale and perform at a level that
>is acceptable to wide general use. Understanding that for many
>operations PostgreSQL on Linux will perform as well if
>not faster than the other well known database with the letter O in their
>
>name.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Joshua Drake
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>cheers
>>
>>andrew
>>
>>
>>---------------------------(end of
>>
>>
>broadcast)---------------------------
>
>
>>TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>>
>>
>
>
>
>