| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | sdv mailer <sdvmailer(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL pre-fork speedup |
| Date: | 2004-05-05 20:14:39 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0405051412550.3093-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 5 May 2004, sdv mailer wrote:
> Forking is quite fast on Linux but creating a new
> process is still 10x more expensive than creating a
> thread and is even worse on Win32 platform. CPU load
> goes up because the OS needs to allocate/deallocate
> memory making it difficult to get a steady state
> resource consumption.
Just a nit to pick here. In Linux, the difference between forking and
spawning a new thread is almost nothing. Definitely less than a factor of
2, and most assuredly less than the quoted factor of 10 here.
The fact that windows has a heavy process / lightweight thread design
means little to me, since I'll likely never deploy a production postgresql
server on it that needs to handle any serious load.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2004-05-05 20:36:13 | Re: PostgreSQL pre-fork speedup |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-05-05 20:09:52 | Re: initdb failure in CVS |