| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Samuel Gendler <sgendler(at)ideasculptor(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Need help in performance tuning. |
| Date: | 2010-07-12 16:04:22 |
| Message-ID: | 201007121604.o6CG4Ma02683@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Craig Ringer wrote:
> It'll need to separate "running queries" from "running processes", or
> start threading backends, so that one way or the other a single query
> can benefit from the capabilities of multiple CPUs. The same separation,
> or a move to async I/O, might be needed to get one query to concurrently
> read multiple partitions of a table, or otherwise get maximum benefit
> from high-capacity I/O subsystems when running just a few big, expensive
> queries.
>
> Otherwise I'm wondering if PostgreSQL will begin really suffering in
> performance on workloads where queries are big and expensive but there
> are relatively few of them running at a time.
Agreed. We certainly are going to have to go in that direction someday.
We have TODO items for these.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | phb07 | 2010-07-12 20:33:17 | Re: Slow query with planner row strange estimation |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-07-12 15:23:16 | Re: performance on new linux box |