Re: PostgreSQL and Linux 2.6 kernel.

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Bruno Wolff III" <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
Cc: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Linux 2.6 kernel.
Date: 2004-04-15 19:35:34
Message-ID: KGEFLMPJFBNNLNOOOPLGKEOLCHAA.simon@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> Bruno Wolff
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > I guess what I'm saying is it's not how many people you've
> got working
> > on the optimizer, its how many accurate field reports of less-than
> > perfect optimization reach them. In that case, PostgreSQL
> is likely in a
> > better position than Microsoft, since the accessibility of the pg
> > discussion lists makes such cases much more likely to get aired.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
>
> I have seen exactly this happen a number of times over the
> last several
> years. However there is still only one Tom Lane implementing the
> improvements.
>

...and very few Mr.Microsofts too.

[I'm uncomfortable with, and it was not my intent, to discuss such an
issue with direct reference to particular individuals. There is no
intent to critiscise or malign anybody named]

Regards, Simon

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-04-15 19:37:21 Re: Toooo many context switches (maybe SLES8?)
Previous Message Shea,Dan [CIS] 2004-04-15 19:24:32 Re: [ SOLVED ] select count(*) very slow on an already