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
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 |
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 |