Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE

From: Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <avbidder(at)fortytwo(dot)ch>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE
Date: 2002-04-18 07:37:46
Message-ID: 1019115466.12600.12.camel@atlas
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2002-04-17 at 19:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
> > OTOH, it is also important where the file is on disk. As seen from disk
> > speed test graphs on http://www.tomshardware.com , the speed difference
> > of sequential reads is 1.5 to 2.5 between inner and outer tracks.
>
> True. But if we use the same test file for both the sequential and
> random-access timings, hopefully the absolute speed of access will
> cancel out. (Again, it's the sort of thing that could use some
> real-world testing...)

Not so sure about that. Random access basically measures latency,
sequential access measures transfer speed. I'd argue that latency is
more or less constant across the disk as it depends on head movement and
the spindle turning.

cheers
-- vbi

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Scherbaum 2002-04-18 08:03:42 Re: new food for the contrib/ directory
Previous Message Maarten.Boekhold 2002-04-18 07:17:34 Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE