| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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? |