| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison |
| Date: | 2008-02-25 20:17:10 |
| Message-ID: | 1203970630.7878.56.camel@dogma.ljc.laika.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 12:05 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:36:56 -0800
> Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
>
> >
> > If there is any significant I/O latency for a single backend, it seems
> > like a context switch could be a win for processor utilization. It
> > might not be a win overall, but at least potentially a win.
>
> Do we want a 20% potential win or an 80% potential win?
>
> I would personally rather keep it simple, hard core, and data shoving
> as possible without any issue with scheduling etc..
>
Just a thought. After it's actually implemented it won't be hard to see
if it's a win.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2008-02-25 20:22:10 | Re: Strange behavior with leap dates and centuries BC |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-25 20:08:29 | Re: [PATCHES] Avahi support for Postgresql |