From: Carlos Moreno <moreno_pg@mochima.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Throttling PostgreSQL's CPU usage
Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 18:32:14 -0400
Message-ID: <4640FA6E.4050003@mochima.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070508205120.GA7983@uio.no>
References: <p0624080bc266892a91b2@[192.168.1.8]>
<20070508205120.GA7983@uio.no>
Steinar H. Gunderson 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 ...
Is it that multiple PostgreSQL processes will end up monopolizing as many
CPU cores as you give it? (ok, that would suck, for sure :-))
If there is a way to guarantee (or at least to encourage) that PG will
not use
more than one, or even two cores, then a quad-core machine looks like a
promising solution... One thing feels kind of certain to me: the kind of
system that the OP describes has a most-demanding need for *extremely
high* CPU power --- multi-core, or multi-CPU, would seem the better
solution anyway, since it promotes responsiveness more than raw CPU
power.
Carlos
--
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: moreno_pg@mochima.com
Subject: Re: Throttling PostgreSQL's CPU usage
In-Reply-To: <4640FA6E.4050003@mochima.com>
* 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