X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CA5F3A19F9;
	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:36:47 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 02464-03; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:36:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from smtp8.jaring.my (smtp8.jaring.my [61.6.32.58])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B20B3A190C;
	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:36:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from nexus.localhost. ([219.95.244.132]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by smtp8.jaring.my (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j0NFa91K087166;
	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 23:36:18 +0800 (MYT)
	(envelope-from lyeoh@pop.jaring.my)
Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.1.20050123233139.03a3adf8@localhost>
X-Sender: lyeoh@localhost
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 23:34:44 +0800
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>,
	Quinton Lawson <qlawson@adelphia.net>
From: Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh@pop.jaring.my>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Windows 2000 Slower Than Windows XP (SOLVED)
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <20050123143548.GA4406@dcc.uchile.cl>
References: <000901c50103$946d2e00$6501a8c0@travis>
	<20050123034709.84430.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<000901c50103$946d2e00$6501a8c0@travis>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Virus-Scanned: JARING E-Mail Virus Scanner v2.0
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.035 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200501/51
X-Sequence-Number: 2810

While not an FAQ (yet?) I find it interesting that installing a QoS packet 
scheduler would _improve_ response - (I'm assuming there's no other 
concurrent traffic other than DB traffic).

Anyone know why this would be the case or have any ideas? Might it improve 
performance for other network software as well...

Regards,
Link.

At 11:35 AM 1/23/2005 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 10:25:30PM -0600, Quinton Lawson wrote:
>
> > By default, Windows XP installs the QoS Packet Scheduler service.  It
> > is not installed by default on Windows 2000.  After I installed QoS
> > Packet Scheduler on the Windows 2000 machine, the latency problem
> > vanished.
>
>Maybe this deserves a FAQ entry or doc note somewhere.