Re: My own performance/tuning q&a

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: My own performance/tuning q&a
Date: 2003-10-24 20:50:34
Message-ID: 200310242050.h9OKoYX22829@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Vivek Khera wrote:
> >>>>> "sm" == scott marlowe <scott.marlowe> writes:
>
>
> sm> Note that Tom has mentioned problems with possible deadlocks when nicing
> sm> individual backends before, so proceed with caution here.
>
> I can see possible starvation, but if scheduling changes cause
> deadlocks, then there's something wrong with the design.

Yes, I think Tom's concern was priority inversion, where a low priority
process holds a lock while a higher one waits for it.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2003-10-24 20:58:11 Re: Performance Concern
Previous Message Anjan Dave 2003-10-24 19:22:45 Re: PostgreSQL data on a NAS device ?