Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 11/28/07 11:13, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 07:29 -0700, Scott Ribe wrote:
>>>> Yes, very much so. Windows lacks the fork() concept, which is what makes
>>>> PostgreSQL much slower there.
>>> So grossly slower process creation would kill postgres connection times. But
>>> what about the cases where persistent connections are used? Is it the case
>>> also that Windows has a performance bottleneck for interprocess
>>> communication?
>> There is at least one other bottleneck, probably more than one. Context
>> switching between processes is a lot more expensive than on Unix (given
>> that win32 is optimized towards context switching between threads). NTFS
>
> Isn't that why Apache2 has separate "thread mode" and 1.x-style
> pre-forked mode?
I think it was a contributing reason for getting it in the first place,
but it's certainly not the only reason...
//Magnus
