From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Transaction Speed and real time database |
Date: | 2006-07-21 22:49:49 |
Message-ID: | 44C15A0D.6040001@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> Ühel kenal päeval, R, 2006-07-21 kell 13:29, kirjutas Andrew Dunstan:
>
>> What you are asking is essentially the equivalent of asking "How long is
>> a piece of string?" The question is meaningless and so will be any
>> answer. The fact that there are web sites which are happy to supply you
>> with meaningless information doesn't mean we should follow suit.
>>
>> And frankly, I would be very dubious about using PostgreSQL or just
>> about any other RDBMS in a Real Time System, hard or soft.
>>
>
> It would probably be possible to get constant-time inserts into an
> indexless table, once checkpoints are spread out over the whole
> checpoint interval, as described by the NTT staff at the conference, but
> this is probably the only RT compatible scenario you can expect from an
> RDBMS.
>
> Another way to get RT is just use long required completion times and
> light enough load on db that you always meet your time limit.
>
> Remember, RT does not neccesarily mean Fast it just needs to be
> Predictable!
>
>
Increasing required time constraints only lowers the likelihood that you
will fail to meet RT requirements, rather than eliminating it.
I suspect that for genuine RT performance we'd need to build in some
sort of preemption mechanism (although I freely confess this isn't my
area of expertise).
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hiroshi Saito | 2006-07-21 23:28:48 | Re: Loading the PL/pgSQL debugger (and other plugins) |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-07-21 21:06:45 | Re: contrib promotion? |