| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Matthew Wakeling" <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Scott Carey" <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 performance tuning questions |
| Date: | 2009-07-30 22:49:14 |
| Message-ID: | 4A71DD1A0200002500029191@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> I suspect if this was a problem the zlib people would have added
> internal buffering ages ago. I find it hard to believe we're not the
> first application to use it this way.
I think that most uses of this library are on entire files or streams.
They may have felt that adding another layer of buffering would just
hurt performance for the typical use case, and anyone using it in some
other way could always use their own buffering layer. In Java adding
that layer took 30 characters of code, so it didn't make a very big
impression on me -- it took a while to even remember I'd had to do it.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2009-07-31 04:10:40 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 performance tuning questions |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2009-07-30 22:40:10 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 performance tuning questions |