| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com,james <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com>,Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>,pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres with pthread |
| Date: | 2017-12-27 10:08:15 |
| Message-ID: | D8C6EFAB-00A4-4658-B67A-9FB11296BF61@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On December 27, 2017 11:05:52 AM GMT+01:00, james <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> wrote:
> > All threads are blocked in semaphores.
>That they are blocked is inevitable - I guess the issue is that they
>are
>thrashing.
>I guess it would be necessary to separate the internals to have some
>internal queueing and effectively reduce the number of actively
>executing threads.
>In effect make the connection pooling work internally.
>
>Would it be possible to make the caches have persistent (functional)
>data structures - effectively CoW?
>
>And how easy would it be to abort if the master view had subsequently
>changed when it comes to execution?
Optimizing for this seems like a pointless exercise. If the goal is efficient processing of 100k connections the solution is a session / connection abstraction and a scheduler. Optimizing for this amount of concurrency just will add complexity and slowdowns for a workload that nobody will run.
Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Maksim Milyutin | 2017-12-27 10:30:35 | Re: Using ProcSignal to get memory context stats from a running backend |
| Previous Message | james | 2017-12-27 10:05:52 | Re: Postgres with pthread |