| From: | Andrea Suisani <sickpig(at)opinioni(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Kohei Kaigai <Kohei(dot)Kaigai(at)emea(dot)nec(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: fstat vs. lseek |
| Date: | 2011-09-16 13:19:07 |
| Message-ID: | 4E734CCB.6090802@opinioni.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
hi
On 08/08/2011 07:50 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Andres Freund<andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> If its ok I will write a mail to lkml referencing this thread and your numbers
>> inline (with attribution obviously).
>
> That would be great. Please go ahead.
I've just stumbled across this thread on lkml [1]
"Improve lseek scalability v3".
and I thought to ping pgsql hackers list
just in case, more to the point they're
asking "are there any real workloads which care
[Make generic lseek lockless safe]"
maybe I've got it wrong but it seems somewhat
related to what has been discussed here and
also in Robert Haas's "Linux and glibc Scalability"
blog post [1].
[cut]
Andrea
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/9/15/399
[2] http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2011/08/linux-and-glibc-scalability.html
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Susanne Ebrecht | 2011-09-16 13:26:55 | Re: Is there really no interest in SQL Standard? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-09-16 13:08:15 | Re: Is there really no interest in SQL Standard? |