Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Threads

From: Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net>
To: mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Serguei Mokhov <mokhov(at)cs(dot)concordia(dot)ca>,Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>,PGHackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Threads
Date: 2003-01-04 03:38:46
Message-ID: 1041651525.15927.207.camel@mouse.copelandconsulting.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 21:39, mlw wrote:
> Connection time should *never* be in the critical path. There, I've
> said it!! People who complain about connection time are barking up the
> wrong tree. Regardless of the methodology, EVERY OS has issues with
> thread creation, process creation, the memory allocation, and system
> manipulation  required to manage it. Under load this is ALWAYS slower.
> 
> I think that if there is ever a choice, "do I make startup time
> faster?" or "Do I make PostgreSQL not need a dump/restore for upgrade"
> the upgrade problem has a much higher impact to real PostgreSQL sites.


Exactly.  Trying to speed up something that shouldn't be in the critical
path is exactly what I'm talking about.

I completely agree with you!


-- 
Greg Copeland <greg(at)copelandconsulting(dot)net>
Copeland Computer Consulting


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: mlwDate: 2003-01-04 03:39:08
Subject: Re: Threads
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-01-04 02:17:39
Subject: Re: Upgrading rant.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group