On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 09:14 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 3:03 AM, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > In case of fully cached database it is closer to 1.
> In the case of a fully cached database I believe the correct answer
> begins with a decimal point.
The number 1 here was suggested in relation to seq_page_cost, which is
For fully cached db there is no additional seek time for random access,
so seq_page_cost == random_page_cost.
Of course there are more variables than just *_page_cost, so if you nail
down any other one, you may end with less than 1 for both page costs.
I have always used seq_page_cost = 1 in my thinking and adjusted others
relative to it.
Hannu Krosing http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Scalability and Availability
Services, Consulting and Training
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-08-04 18:00:36|
|Subject: Re: Questions on query planner, join types, and work_mem |
|Previous:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2010-08-04 17:00:09|
|Subject: Re: LIKE without wildcard different from =|