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

Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Win32 port list <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code
Date: 2003-11-17 15:34:42
Message-ID: 200311171534.hAHFYgM05734@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > So, by my logic, if we have 100 backends all doing updates, we will
> need
> > 10 * 100 or 1000 writer processes or threads to keep up with that
> load.
> > That seems quite excessive to me from a context switching and process
> > overhead perspective.
> 
> Quick point:
> A single process using multiple threads dedicated to writing is an
> excellent optimization target on the win32 platform, (and if it is
> similarly useful on other platforms, so much the better).  To my way of
> thinking, this is an ideal approach in the long run.
> 
> Multiple processes scheduling writes (even it is only 10), IMO, is a bad
> idea because of the way process management on win32 works for various
> reasons.

Yes, Win32 is going to need something like this because it doesn't have
sync.  The issue is whether Unix should use it too.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2003-11-18 13:12:59
Subject: Re: SRA Win32 sync() code
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-11-17 15:33:49
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code

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