On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 12:07:56PM -0800, Ron Mayer wrote: > Jim Nasby wrote: > > The problem with using simple OS priority settings is you leave yourself > > wide open to priority inversion. > > Which is why you either > (a) note that papers studying priority inversion on RDBMS's > find that it's a non issue on many RDBMS workloads; and > (except for real-time databases) you tend to still get > at least partial benefits even in the face of priority > inversions. > or > (b) use a scheduler in your OS that supports priority > inheritance or other mechanisms to avoid priority > inversion problems. > If you want to use priority inheritance to avoid > the priority inversion settings it appears versions > of Linux, BSD, Windows, and Solaris at least give > you the ability to do so. > > > There is already work being done on a queuing system; take a look at the > > bizgres archives. > > Which is cool; but not quite the same as priorities. > > It seems to me that Bizgres and/or PostgreSQL would not > want to re-implement OS features like schedulers. Actually, I believe part of the discussion also involved how to handle long-running workloads that you don't want to monopolize the machine. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel@xxxxxxxxxxx Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
