Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: reducing random_page_cost from 4 to 2 to force index scan

From: Vitalii Tymchyshyn <tivv00(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: reducing random_page_cost from 4 to 2 to force index scan
Date: 2011-05-24 09:12:34
Message-ID: 4DDB7682.9040402@gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Hello.

As of me, all this "hot" thing really looks like uncertain and dynamic 
enough.
Two things that I could directly use right now (and they are needed in 
pair) are:
1)Per-table/index/database bufferpools (split shared buffer into parts, 
allow to specify which index/table/database goes where)
2)Per-table/index cost settings

If I had this, I could allocate specific bufferpools for tables/indexes 
that MUST be hot in memory and set low costs for this specific tables.
P.S. Third thing, great to have to companion this two is "Load on 
startup" flag to automatically populate bufferpools with fast sequential 
read, but this can be easily emulated with a statement.

Best regards, Vitalii Tymchyshyn

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Cédric VillemainDate: 2011-05-24 11:16:44
Subject: Re: Hash Anti Join performance degradation
Previous:From: Craig RingerDate: 2011-05-24 05:53:00
Subject: Re: Hash Anti Join performance degradation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group