Re: Re: beta5 ...

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <vadim4o(at)email(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Re: beta5 ...
Date: 2001-02-17 17:23:49
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.33.0102171322280.81548-100000@mobile.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > >
> > > BTW, is 7.1 going to be a bit slower than 7.0? Or just Beta 5? Just
> > > curious. Don't mind waiting for 7.2 for the speed-up if necessary.
> >
> > It is possible that it will be ... the question is whether the slow down
> > is unbearable or not, as to whether we'll let it hold things up or not ...
> >
> > >From reading one of Tom's email's, it looks like the changes to 'fix' the
> > slowdown are drastic/large enough that it might not be safe (or desirable)
> > to fix it at this late of a stage in beta ...
> >
> > Depending on what is involved, we might put out a v7.1 for March 1st, so
> > that ppl can feel confident about using the various features, but have a
> > v7.1.1 that follows relatively closely on its heels that addresses the
> > performance problem ...
>
> The easy fix is to just set the delay to zero. Looks like that will fix
> most of the problem.

Except that Vadim had a reason for setting it to 5, and I'm loath to see
that changed unless someone actaully understands the ramifications other
then increasing performance ...

> The near-committers thing may indeed be overkill, and certainly is not
> worth holding beta.

What is this 'near-committers thing'??

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-02-17 17:26:31 Re: Microsecond sleeps with select()
Previous Message Lamar Owen 2001-02-17 16:55:03 Re: Microsecond sleeps with select()