| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.0.X and the ARC patent |
| Date: | 2005-02-19 04:15:37 |
| Message-ID: | 200502190415.j1J4Fbm15588@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Still to be determined: what we lose in extra I/O from the presumably
> less efficient cache management; also what sort of slowdown occurs on
> a single-CPU machine that isn't going to get any benefit from the
> increased amount of lock management. But it looks promising.
Yea, that was one of my questions --- the new buffer locking helps SMP,
but how much does it hurt single-cpu machines? Do we need autodetection
or a GUC to control SMP-beneficial locking?
--
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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-02-19 04:47:40 | Re: Help me recovering data |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-19 03:58:34 | Re: UTF8 or Unicode |