Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Mark Lewis
Subject Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Date
Msg-id 1158867714.9657.1680.camel@archimedes
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as  ("Bucky Jordan" <bjordan@lumeta.com>)
List pgsql-performance
> So this might be a dumb question, but the above statements apply to the
> cluster (e.g. postmaster) as a whole, not per postgres
> process/transaction correct? So each transaction is blocked waiting for
> the main postmaster to retrieve the data in the order it was requested
> (i.e. not multiple scanners/aio)?

Each connection runs its own separate back-end process, so these
statements apply per PG connection (=process).

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Bucky Jordan"
Date:
Subject: Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Next
From: Markus Schaber
Date:
Subject: Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as