| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, NikhilS <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "Raja Agrawal" <raja(dot)agrawal(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [SPAM?] Re: Asynchronous I/O Support |
| Date: | 2006-10-20 19:04:55 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150610201204u373d0690k62545db46db9d282@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/20/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> So far I've seen no evidence that async I/O would help us, only a lot
> of wishful thinking.
is this thread moot? while researching this thread I came across this
article: http://kerneltrap.org/node/6642 describing claims of 30%
performance boost when using posix_fadvise to ask the o/s to prefetch
data. istm that this kind of improvement is in line with what aio can
provide, and posix_fadvise is cleaner, not requiring threads and such.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-10-20 19:10:30 | Re: [SPAM?] Re: Asynchronous I/O Support |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-20 18:21:04 | Re: [SPAM?] Re: Asynchronous I/O Support |