| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andreas Kostyrka <andreas(at)kostyrka(dot)org>, "Carlos H(dot) Reimer" <carlos(dot)reimer(at)opendb(dot)com(dot)br>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Brad Nicholson <bnichols(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info> |
| Subject: | Re: RES: Priority to a mission critical transaction |
| Date: | 2006-11-29 01:11:12 |
| Message-ID: | 456CDE30.4010502@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-performance |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> All,
>
> The Bizgres project is working on resource management for PostgreSQL. So far,
> however, they have been able to come up with schemes that work for BI/DW at
> the expense of OLTP. Becuase of O^N lock checking issues, resource
> management for OLTP which doesn't greatly reduce overall performance seems a
> near-impossible task.
>
Right - I guess it is probably more correct to say that the
implementation used in Bizgres is specifically targeted at BI/DW
workloads rather than OLTP.
At this point we have not measured its impact on concurrency in anything
other than a handwaving manner - e.g pgbench on an older SMP system
showed what looked like about a 10% hit. However the noise level for
pgbench is typically >10% so - a better benchmark on better hardware is
needed.
Cheers
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Mayer | 2006-11-29 01:20:38 | Re: RES: Priority to a mission critical transaction |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-28 23:44:45 | Re: RES: Priority to a mission critical transaction |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Mayer | 2006-11-29 01:20:38 | Re: RES: Priority to a mission critical transaction |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-28 23:44:45 | Re: RES: Priority to a mission critical transaction |