Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY benchmarks?
От | prashanth@jibenetworks.com |
---|---|
Тема | Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY benchmarks? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030429194624.GA3037@prashanth.jibenetworks.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY benchmarks? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY benchmarks?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 10:19:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > prashanth@jibenetworks.com writes: > > I'm not an expert on signals, not even a novice, so I might be totally > > off base, but it seems like the Async Notification implementation does > > not scale. > > Very possibly. You didn't even mention the problems that would occur if > the pg_listener table didn't get vacuumed often enough. > > The pghackers archives contain some discussion about reimplementing > listen/notify using a non-table-based infrastructure. But AFAIK no one > has picked up that task yet. I found some messages in 03/2002 that also brought up the performance issue. You had suggested the use of shared-memory, and made reference to a "SI model". I did find see any alternative non-table-based suggestions. What is the "SI model"? Thanks, --prashanth
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: