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

Re: pg_dump & performance degradation

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation
Date: 2000-08-01 12:46:38
Message-ID: 200008011246.IAA14636@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
> 
> Is this the sort of problem that nice() might solve, or not?

No.  Nice only handles CPU scheduling, not I/O.  In fact, most kernels
give I/O bound processed higher priority because they are using valuable
shared resources while doing the I/O, so the kernel wants it to finish
as quickly as possible.

> 
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > > >> I think Philip's idea of adding some delays into pg_dump is a reasonable
> > > >> answer.  I'm just recommending a KISS approach to implementing the
> > > >> delay, in the absence of evidence that a more complex mechanism will
> > > >> actually buy anything...
> > > >
> > > >I am worried about feature creep here.
> 


-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-08-01 13:02:26
Subject: pg_dump & ownership (again)
Previous:From: Trond Eivind=?iso-8859-1?q?_Glomsr=F8d?=Date: 2000-08-01 11:57:25
Subject: Re: RPMs built for Mandrake

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Don BaccusDate: 2000-08-01 13:05:53
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation
Previous:From: jeff seamanDate: 2000-08-01 12:37:12
Subject: pg_dump problem

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