Re: PG on NFS may be just a bad idea

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > > > http://blogs.netapp.com/dave/2007/08/oracle-optimize.html
> > >
> > > Not a whole lot of technical content there, but pretty interesting
> > > nonetheless. I *think* that the issues we're seeing are largely in the
> > > NFS client-side kernel code, so bypassing that stack as Oracle is doing
> > > might eliminate the problem. Of course, there's a sizable amount of
> > > code to be written to do that ...
> >
> > Yeah. Next step we will be writing our own malloc.
>
> I assume there should be a ;-) in there because we already have our own
> malloc (palloc).

Yeah, some sort of smiley should be there. But what I'm talking about
is rewriting the underlying memory allocation mechanism, just like we
would be rewriting the NFS client.

palloc uses malloc underneath. My thought is to replace that with
sbrk, mmap or something like that. Not very portable though, a lot of
work, and most likely not nearly enough benefits.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.PlanetPostgreSQL.org/
"Nadie esta tan esclavizado como el que se cree libre no siendolo" (Goethe)