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

Re: CPU bound

From: James Cloos <cloos(at)jhcloos(dot)com>
To: Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com>
Cc: Royce Ausburn <royce(at)inomial(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance\(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CPU bound
Date: 2010-12-20 15:33:26
Message-ID: m362uo5uht.fsf@jhcloos.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
>>>>> "MG" == Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com> writes:

MG> Good time accounting is the most compelling reason for having a wait
MG> event interface, like Oracle. Without the wait event interface, one
MG> cannot really tell where the time is spent, at least not without
MG> profiling the database code, which is not an option for a production
MG> database.

And how exactly, given that the kernel does not know whether the CPU is
active or waiting on ram, could an application do so?

-JimC
-- 
James Cloos <cloos(at)jhcloos(dot)com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Kenneth MarshallDate: 2010-12-20 15:48:47
Subject: Re: CPU bound
Previous:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2010-12-20 14:24:14
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 x64 bit pgbench TPC very low question?

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