On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:32:14PM -0400, Carlos Moreno wrote: >> Or use a dual-core system. :-) > Am I missing something?? There is just *one* instance of this idea in, > what, four replies?? I find it so obvious, and so obviously the only > solution that has any hope to work, that it makes me think I'm missing > something ...
Actually, it should be added that this suggestion was only partially tongue-in-cheek. I wrote a 3D application as part of an internship a couple of years ago, and it had a problem that worked vaguely like the given scenario: Adding a background task (in this case the task that loaded in new pieces of terrain) would kill the framerate for the user, but nicing down (actually, down-prioritizing, as this was on Windows) the back-end would starve it completely of cycles. The solution was to just define that this would only be run on multiprocessor systems, where both tasks would chug along nicely :-) /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
