From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
Cc: Nick Barr <nicky@chuckie.co.uk>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: go for a script! / ex: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 20:11:55 -0400
Message-ID: <3816.1066090315@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031013191023.GB72842@perrin.nxad.com>
References: <007901c38f2b$0b585590$2802a8c0@webbased10>
<3F8819EF.7010004@chuckie.co.uk>
<3F88BFD7.1020808@familyhealth.com.au>
<200310121331.42693.josh@agliodbs.com>
<20031013191023.GB72842@perrin.nxad.com>
Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> writes:
> Every few months one of the uber core BSD hackers threatens to rewrite
> that part of PG because high up in the BSD camp, it's common belief
> that shm* is a source of performance loss for PostgreSQL.
They're full of it. RAM is RAM, no? Once you've got the memory mapped
into your address space, it's hard to believe that it matters how you
got hold of it.
In any case, mmap doesn't have the semantics we need. See past
discussions.
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sean@chittenden.org, josh@agliodbs.com, chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, nicky@chuckie.co.uk
Subject: Re: go for a script! / ex: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL
In-Reply-To: <3816.1066090315@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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