From: | Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: VLDB Features |
Date: | 2007-12-18 16:41:20 |
Message-ID: | 1469D789-B496-4252-851A-986BE62AD03D@decibel.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Dec 12, 2007, at 1:26 PM, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Sure. Imagine you have a 5TB database on a machine with 8 cores
>> and only one concurrent user. You'd like to have 1 core doing I/
>> O, and say 4-5 cores dividing the scan and join processing into
>> 4-5 chunks.
>
> Ah, right, thank for enlightenment. Heck, I'm definitely too
> focused on replication and distributed databases :-)
>
> However, there's certainly a great deal of an intersection between
> parallel processing on different machines and parallel processing
> on multiple CPUs - especially considering NUMA architecture. *comes-
> to-think-again*...
Except that doing something in-machine is often far simpler than
trying to go cross-machine, especially when that something is a
background reader.
Let's walk before we run. :)
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Decibel! | 2007-12-18 17:12:32 | Re: WORM and Read Only Tables (v0.1) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-18 16:30:22 | Re: binary array and record recv |