> Thanks Magnus,
> So are we correct to rely on
> - 8 being slower than 7.x in general and
> - 8 on Win32 being a little faster than 8 on Cygwin?
> Will the final release of 8 be faster than the beta?
I'm pretty certain that previous to 8.0 no win32 based postgesql
properly sync()ed the files. Win32 does not have sync(), and it is
impossible to emulate it without relying on the application to track
which files to sync. 8.0 does this because it fsync()s the files
individually. Therefore, benchmarking fsync=on on 8.0 to a <8.0 version
of windows is not apples to apples. This includes, by the way, the SFU
based port of postgresql because they didn't implement sync() there,
Other than the sync() issue, the cygwin/win32 i/o performance should be
roughly equal. Unless I'm terribly mistaken about things, all the i/o
calls should boil down to win32 api calls.
The cygwin IPC stack is implemented differently...pg 8.0 win32 native
version does all the ipc stuff by hand, so you might get slightly
different behavior there.
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-10-15 16:48:14|
|Subject: Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ... |
|Previous:||From: Doug Y||Date: 2004-10-15 16:07:27|
|Subject: Tuning shared_buffers with ipcs ?|
pgsql-hackers-win32 by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-10-15 17:55:11|
|Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Performance on Win32 vs Cygwin |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-10-15 15:37:40|
|Subject: Re: Performance on Win32 vs Cygwin |