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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-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

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Don Baccus 2000-08-01 13:05:53 Re: pg_dump & performance degradation
Previous Message jeff seaman 2000-08-01 12:37:12 pg_dump problem

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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