Re: PostgreSQL on multi-CPU systems
От | darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL on multi-CPU systems |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010315125317.C3B921A68@druid.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL on multi-CPU systems (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL on multi-CPU systems
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thus spake Tom Lane > Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp> writes: > > I have tested PostgreSQL with 2-4 CPU linux boxes. In summary, 2 CPU > > was a big win, but 4 was not. I'm not sure where the bottle neck is > > though. > > Our not-very-good implementation of spin locking (using select() to > wait) might have something to do with this. Sometime soon I'd like to > look at using POSIX semaphores where available, instead of spinlocks. One thing I notice is that a single query can seem to block other queries, at least to some extent. It makes me wonder if we effectively have a single threaded system. In fact, I have some simple queries that if I send a bunch at once, the first one can take 15 seconds while the others zip through. Is this related to what you are talking about? -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: