From: Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Throttling PostgreSQL's CPU usage
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 00:40:05 +0200
Message-ID: <20070508224004.GA8878@uio.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4640FA6E.4050003@mochima.com>
References: <p0624080bc266892a91b2@[192.168.1.8]>
<20070508205120.GA7983@uio.no>
<4640FA6E.4050003@mochima.com>
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:32:14PM -0400, Carlos Moreno wrote:
>> Or use a dual-core system. :-)
> Am I missing something?? There is just *one* instance of this idea in,
> what, four replies?? I find it so obvious, and so obviously the only
> solution that has any hope to work, that it makes me think I'm missing
> something ...
Actually, it should be added that this suggestion was only partially
tongue-in-cheek. I wrote a 3D application as part of an internship a couple
of years ago, and it had a problem that worked vaguely like the given
scenario: Adding a background task (in this case the task that loaded in new
pieces of terrain) would kill the framerate for the user, but nicing down
(actually, down-prioritizing, as this was on Windows) the back-end would
starve it completely of cycles. The solution was to just define that this
would only be run on multiprocessor systems, where both tasks would chug
along nicely :-)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
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: sgunderson@bigfoot.com
Subject: Re: Throttling PostgreSQL's CPU usage
In-Reply-To: <20070508224004.GA8878@uio.no>
* 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