On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 12:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > So we would be able to cache other items also?
> Only to the extent that you can guarantee a stale cache entry isn't a
> problem. We've already done the analysis involved for the existing
> metapage entries, but anything else would require more thought. (And
> more cache flush events.)
You mean performance tests! Will do.
Methinks that cache flushing is the key to performance for that idea.
> > For that case we'd save N block accesses to locate the rightmost leaf
> > page.
> Surely you mean log(N).
Depends what N is. I meant the level, not the number of rows.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Stephen Frost||Date: 2006-04-26 17:31:39|
|Subject: Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission"|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-04-26 16:53:55|
|Subject: Re: Avoiding redundant fetches of btree index metapages |