Re: Process balancing on smp db server/apache web server

From: Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com>
To: "Peter Darley" <pdarley(at)kinesis-cem(dot)com>
Cc: "Pgsql-General" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Process balancing on smp db server/apache web server
Date: 2002-05-23 15:18:53
Message-ID: m37klu7uzm.fsf@varsoon.wireboard.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Peter Darley" <pdarley(at)kinesis-cem(dot)com> writes:

> Friends,
> I have been thinking about my smp db server and how it interacts with my
> web server. I'm using mod_perl on Apache, which uses Apache::DBI to connect
> to the db server via a private network segment. It occurs to me that since
> the web server is connecting early (on startup), when there is probably no
> load on the db server, the cpu that each backend is assigned to will be
> largely random, or, if there is a large syslogd operation or something right
> at that time, it might even put the majority of backends on the same
> processor.

Ummm.... All Unices that I know of do dynamic migration of tasks
between processors as needed. When a process (or thread) is ready to
run, the OS will try to pick a free CPU for it. So this shouldn't be
an issue. You have to do something special to lock processes to one
processor--commercial systems like Solaris and Irix have APIs to do
this, and there are patches for Linux I believe. But if you just want
to use the CPUs most efficiently, the default schedulaer behavior is
usually what you want.

Ultimately, most databases loads are I/O bound anyway, so it'd be more
worth your while to worry about your disk subsystem. ;)

-Doug

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Wm. G. Urquhart 2002-05-23 15:19:25 Re: Violation of NOT NULL
Previous Message Ed Loehr 2002-05-23 15:18:07 "smart-fast" shutdown?