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

Re: TCP Overhead on Local Loopback

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andy <angelflow(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Ofer Israeli <oferi(at)checkpoint(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TCP Overhead on Local Loopback
Date: 2012-04-02 11:34:45
Message-ID: 4F798ED5.1090602@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 04/01/2012 09:11 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 04/01/2012 08:29 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>  
>> wrote:
>>>> You could try using Unix domain socket and see if the performance
>>>> improves. A relevant link:
>>>
>>> He said Windows. There are no Unix domain sockets on Windows. (And 
>>> please
>>> don't top-post)
>> Windows supports named pipes, which are functionally similar, but I
>> don't think pg supports them.
>>
>
> Correct, so telling the OP to have a look at them isn't at all 
> helpful. And they are not supported on all Windows platforms we 
> support either (specifically not on XP, AIUI).
>
>

Apparently I was mistaken about the availability. However, my initial 
point remains. Since all our  client/server comms on Windows are over 
TCP, telling the OP to look at Unix domain sockets is unhelpful.

cheers

andrew

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jeff JanesDate: 2012-04-02 16:51:39
Subject: Re: TCP Overhead on Local Loopback
Previous:From: Samuel GendlerDate: 2012-04-02 08:25:09
Subject: Re: TCP Overhead on Local Loopback

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