Re: Comparison of PGSQL and DB2
От | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Comparison of PGSQL and DB2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20040310200400.GB29779@phlogiston.dyndns.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Comparison of PGSQL and DB2 (Josh Berkus <josh@postgresql.org>) |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 10:22:24AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > > User Defined Task Prioritization > > (Ability to define rules on how the database should prioritize workloads > either by query cost or user profiles. Ability to monitor resource usage and > adjust the priority of queries or cancel runaway queries that exceed > predefined limits.) > > This would be nice. We're not sure how to implement it; don't > expect it soon for PostgreSQL. Note that we do have a part of this, if "runaway queries" == "queries which run too long". I suspect that what would really be needed, however, is something running on the OS to detect timeslice or memory hogs. > > Parallel Backup / Restore (Ability to perform backup/restore of > > large databases faster by leveraging > all the processors in a multi-processor machine.) > > This is directly related to the above feature. We can simulate it though, right? Use the binary file format for pg_dump, and hand out pieces of recovery to different restorers depending on your number of processors, one table at a time per restorer. (Afilias -- Chris Browne, really -- wrote something along these lines for the import of the .org database. I talked about it a little at OSCON last year.) This is very far from the user-friendly tool that IBM offers, of course. A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: