On 11/28/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:53:34 -0800
> "Trevor Talbot" <quension@gmail.com> 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.
> > I mean, I can understand NT having bottlenecks in various areas
> > compared to Unix, but this "threads are specially optimized" thing is
> > seeming a bit overblown. Just how often do you see threads from a
> > single process get contiguous access to the CPU?
> I thought it was more about the cost to fork() a process in win32?
Creating a process is indeed expensive on Windows, but a followup
question was about the performance when using persistent connections,
and therefore not creating processes. That's where the conversation
got more interesting :)
