From: Ron Peacetree <rjpeace@earthlink.net>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:25:31 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <12692871.1127953531542.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (raw)
If I've done this correctly, there should not be anywhere near
the number of context switches we currently see while sorting.
Each unscheduled context switch represents something unexpected
occuring or things not being where they are needed when they are
needed. Reducing such circumstances to the absolute minimum
was one of the design goals.
Reducing the total amount of IO to the absolute minimum should
help as well.
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Sent: Sep 27, 2005 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
I can't help wondering how a couple thousand context switches per
second would affect the attempt to load disk info into the L1 and
L2 caches. That's pretty much the low end of what I see when the
server is under any significant load.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: rjpeace@earthlink.net, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
In-Reply-To: <12692871.1127953531542.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox