> To: camiloporto(at)hotmail(dot)com
> CC: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] URGENT HELP about 'duration' stats
> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:06:22 -0400
> From: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
> Camilo Porto <camiloporto(at)hotmail(dot)com> writes:
> > The problem I have encountered is that the sum of executor's
> > duration time is, *sometimes*, bigger than the total time interval in
> > which the statements had been executed!! And this makes no sense!
> Umm ... why not? If you have, say, two queries executing in parallel
> for 1 second, they'll each report a duration: of 1 second, thus summing
> to 2 seconds, but the elapsed time was only 1 second.
> If you don't see that always, then your benchmark program isn't trying
> very hard to run more than one query in parallel ...
This really make sense, but let me add some questions:
The parallelism happens even if my PC has only one processor?
Each query is executed in a separeted Thread?
I am simulating only 1 client with the Benchmark. Can 1 Client submit parallel queries, in single-processor enviroment?
> regards, tom lane
Veja mapas e encontre as melhores rotas para fugir do trânsito com o Live Search Maps!
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-10-27 14:18:11|
|Subject: Re: Proposal: real procedures again (8.4) |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-10-27 14:04:20|
|Subject: Re: WAL archiving idle database |