From: | David Wilson <david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Clark <codingninja(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Should PQconsumeInput/PQisBusy be expensive to use? |
Date: | 2010-10-27 21:31:59 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikNS5XAEYf_eAc-xcfyW0rw33xfZ4G-TsppHDXn@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Michael Clark <codingninja(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:
>
> while ( ((consume_result = PQconsumeInput(self.db)) == 1) &&
> ((is_busy_result = PQisBusy(self.db)) == 1) )
> ;
>
>
> The problem with this code is that it's effectively useless as a test.
You're just spinning in a loop; if you don't have anything else to be doing
while waiting for responses, then this sort of calling pattern is always
going to be worse than just blocking.
Only do async if you actually have an async problem, and only do a
performance test on it if you're actually doing a real async test, otherwise
the results are fairly useless.
--
- David T. Wilson
david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-10-27 22:10:54 | Re: Should PQconsumeInput/PQisBusy be expensive to use? |
Previous Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2010-10-27 21:30:43 | Re: Should PQconsumeInput/PQisBusy be expensive to use? |