X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 979459DCC6C for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:38:11 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 85604-03 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:38:15 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from floppy.pyrenet.fr (news.pyrenet.fr [194.116.145.2]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBD7C9DC8DA for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:38:08 -0400 (AST) Received: by floppy.pyrenet.fr (Postfix, from userid 106) id 0570730920; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 03:38:13 +0100 (MET) From: Christopher Browne X-Newsgroups: pgsql.performance Subject: Re: Scaling up PostgreSQL in Multiple CPU / Dual Core Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 21:22:34 -0500 Organization: cbbrowne Computing Inc Lines: 26 Message-ID: <87hd5olgyd.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com> References: <65f9ddfb0603222219r1742c2aevda37acd55ca845be@mail.gmail.com> <1143131901.17999.67.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> <4422D033.2030407@commandprompt.com> <1143133364.17999.77.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.hub.org X-message-flag: Outlook is rather hackable, isn't it? X-Home-Page: http://www.cbbrowne.com/info/ X-Affero: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=cbbrowne User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.19 (linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:4Pzri7CFuX7/yhBkBcSxl5L4qvQ= To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.717 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.096, INFO_TLD=0.813] X-Spam-Score: 0.717 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/477 X-Sequence-Number: 17914 Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when smarlowe@g2switchworks.com (Scott Marlowe) wrote: > On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 10:43, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> > Has someone been working on the problem of splitting a query into pieces >> > and running it on multiple CPUs / multiple machines? Yes. Bizgress has >> > done that. >> >> I believe that is limited to Bizgress MPP yes? > > Yep. I hope that someday it will be released to the postgresql global > dev group for inclusion. Or at least parts of it. Question: Does the Bizgress/MPP use threading for this concurrency? Or forking? If it does so via forking, that's more portable, and less dependent on specific complexities of threading implementations (which amounts to non-portability ;-)). Most times Jan comes to town, we spend a few minutes musing about the "splitting queries across threads" problem, and dismiss it again; if there's the beginning of a "split across processes," that's decidedly neat :-). -- output = reverse("moc.liamg" "@" "enworbbc") http://linuxfinances.info/info/internet.html Why do we put suits in a garment bag, and put garments in a suitcase?