| From: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc |
| Cc: | "Steinar H(dot) Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? |
| Date: | 2005-10-08 04:20:59 |
| Message-ID: | BF6C973B.10E2B%llonergan@greenplum.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Mark,
On 10/7/05 5:17 PM, "mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc" <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 04:55:28PM -0700, Luke Lonergan wrote:
>> On 10/5/05 5:12 PM, "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com> wrote:
>>> What? strlen is definitely not in the kernel, and thus won't count as
>>> system time.
>> System time on Linux includes time spent in glibc routines.
>
> Do you have a reference for this?
>
> I believe this statement to be 100% false.
How about 99%? OK, you're right, I had this confused with the profiling
problem where glibc routines aren't included in dynamic linked profiles.
Back to the statements earlier - the output of time had much of time for a
dd spent in system, which means kernel, so where in the kernel would that be
exactly?
- Luke
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | sandeep satpal | 2005-10-08 07:18:50 | Re: Issue is changing _bt_compare function and |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-08 03:59:01 | Re: Reuse the dead item on unique index. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2005-10-08 10:44:09 | Re: count(*) using index scan in "query often, update rarely" environment |
| Previous Message | mark | 2005-10-08 00:17:04 | Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? |