Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([192.204.191.242])
	by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f55HTAE09264
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 13:29:10 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f55HT7R18470;
	Tue, 5 Jun 2001 13:29:07 -0400 (EDT)
To: Kevin Brown <Kevin.M.Brown@asu.edu>
cc: "'pgsql-admin@postgresql.org'" <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Hello... 
In-reply-to: <A021872EC2BDD411AB3600902746A05501375354@mainex4.asu.edu> 
References: <A021872EC2BDD411AB3600902746A05501375354@mainex4.asu.edu>
Comments: In-reply-to Kevin Brown <Kevin.M.Brown@asu.edu>
	message dated "Tue, 05 Jun 2001 08:39:11 -0700"
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 13:29:07 -0400
Message-ID: <18467.991762147@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Archive-Number: 200106/21
X-Sequence-Number: 1557

Kevin Brown <Kevin.M.Brown@asu.edu> writes:
> Under v7.0.3, if I ran multiple queries on this box they would each run on a
> different processor and wouldn't impact on each others performance until I
> ran more queries than CPUs.  Now when I run queries they all stay on one
> processor and cause the queries to take longer by fighting for resources.

I know of no reason for that to have changed.  Afraid you'll have to do
some investigation of your own to discover the cause.

			regards, tom lane