From: | Rodrigo E(dot) De León Plicet <rdeleonp(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Don't Thread On Me (PostgreSQL related) |
Date: | 2012-02-04 01:53:15 |
Message-ID: | 478057b7-8379-4e48-b482-ac45d4ee4c88@m5g2000yqk.googlegroups.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Jan 26, 4:52 pm, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet <rdele(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> Quote:
>
> ======================================================================
>
> This thread
>
> http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Multithread-Query-Planner-td5...
>
> was mentioned in a performance sub-group posting. Give it a read.
>
> Back? It means, so far as I can see, that PG is toast. It will fall
> down to being the cheap and dirty alternative to MySql, which even
> has, at least two, multi-threaded engines. DB2 switched it's *nix
> engine to threads from processes with release 9.5. Oracle claims it
> for releases going back to 7 (I haven't tried to determine which parts
> or applications; Larry has bought so many tchochtkes over the
> years...). SQL Server is threaded.
>
> Given that cpu's are breeding threads faster than cores,
> PG will fall into irrelevance.
>
> ======================================================================
>
> Source:http://drcoddwasright.blogspot.com/2012/01/dont-thread-on-me.html
>
> Comments?
Author's followup:
http://drcoddwasright.blogspot.com/2012/02/damn-you-damocles.html
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Angelico | 2012-02-04 02:19:32 | Re: Warning: you don't own a lock of type ExclusiveLock |
Previous Message | Gary Chambers | 2012-02-03 21:27:53 | Warning: you don't own a lock of type ExclusiveLock |