Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ...
От | Marc G. Fournier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030310224706.T35660@hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ... (Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in rc/incl ...
|
Список | pgsql-committers |
yOn Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Sean Chittenden wrote: > > >>> Has anyone ever thought about adding kqueue (for *BSD) support to > > >>> Postgres, instead of using select? > > >> > > >> Why? poll() is standard. kqueue isn't, AFAIK. > > > > > It's supposed be a whole heap faster - there is no polling involved... > > > > Supposed by whom? Faster than what? And how would it not poll? > > > > The way libpq uses this call, it's either probing for current status > > (timeout=0) or it's willing to block, possibly indefinitely, until the > > desired condition arises. It does not sit there in a busy-wait loop. > > I can't see any reason to think that an OS-specific API would give > > any marked difference in performance. > > Heh, kqueue is _the_ reason to use FreeBSD. > > http://www.kegel.com/dkftpbench/Poller_bench.html#results > > I've toyed with the idea of adding this because it is monstrously more > efficient than select()/poll() in basically every way, shape, and > form. I would personally be interested in seeing patches ... what would be involved?
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: