Re: Réf
От | Alex Turner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Réf |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 33c6269f0504061140363ac662@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Réf (Rod Taylor <pg@rbt.ca>) |
Ответы |
Re: Réf
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
I think his point was that 9 * 4 != 2400 Alex Turner netEconomist On Apr 6, 2005 2:23 PM, Rod Taylor <pg@rbt.ca> wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 19:42 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:18:29PM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote: > > > Yeah, I think that can be done provided there is more than one worker. > > > My limit seems to be about 1000 transactions per second each with a > > > single insert for a single process (round trip time down the Fibre > > > Channel is large) but running 4 simultaneously only drops throughput to > > > about 900 per process (total of 2400 transactions per second) and the > > > machine still seemed to have lots of oomph to spare. > > > > Erm, have I missed something here? 900 * 4 = 2400? > > Nope. You've not missed anything. > > If I ran 10 processes and the requirement would be met. > -- > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: