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

Re: Initial prefetch performance testing

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Initial prefetch performance testing
Date: 2008-10-01 11:02:10
Message-ID: 87r6701sul.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:

> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 16:46 +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
>
>> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> 
>> > I'd prefer to set this as a tablespace level storage parameter. 
>> 
>> Sounds, like a good idea, except... what's a tablespace level storage parameter?
>
> A storage parameter, just at tablespace level.
>
> WITH (storage_parameter = value)

I still think this is a good idea but I still think there are unanswered
questions about it. Surely whatever we do with this parameter also holds for
random_page_cost and sequential_page_cost as well? 

Should they remain GUC parameters at all? If so, how would setting any of them
locally interact with the tablespace parameter for tables used in the query? 

-- 
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2008-10-01 12:59:33
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous:From: Harald Armin MassaDate: 2008-10-01 09:56:33
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

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