From: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Replication on the backend |
Date: | 2005-12-06 15:43:10 |
Message-ID: | 60y82yi641.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
gustavotonini(at)gmail(dot)com (Gustavo Tonini) writes:
> But, wouldn't the performance be better? And wouldn't asynchronous
> messages be better processed?
Why do you think performance would be materially affected by this?
The MAJOR performance bottleneck is normally the slow network
connection between servers.
When looked at in the perspective of that bottleneck, pretty much
everything else is just noise. (Sometimes pretty loud noise, but
still noise :-).)
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="cbbrowne.com" in name ^ "@" ^ tld;;
http://cbbrowne.com/info/spreadsheets.html
"When the grammar checker identifies an error, it suggests a
correction and can even makes some changes for you."
-- Microsoft Word for Windows 2.0 User's Guide, p.35:
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-12-06 15:44:36 | Re: Oddity with extract microseconds? |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-12-06 15:42:53 | Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working |