Re: About tapes

From: "mac_man2005(at)hotmail(dot)it" <mac_man2005(at)hotmail(dot)it>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: About tapes
Date: 2010-06-18 19:11:57
Message-ID: BLU0-SMTP93C48E617F26B5CC5AFADE6C00@phx.gbl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Il 18/06/2010 21:00, Robert Haas ha scritto:
> On Fri, Jun 18
> Did you read the rest of the comment? It explains how the code avoids this...
>
>

Robert, thanks for your reply.
I read the rest of the document, but please take in account that my
question wasn't about "avoiding".
My question is "in which cases"?

I repeat my question. Tuplesort.c and logtape.c DO implement tapes on
disk and currently they do not request 2x or 4x of the input space: so,
again, in which case implementing tapes on disks requires between 2x and
4x of input space?

Thanks for your attention.
Manolo.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-06-18 19:16:28 Re: About tapes
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-06-18 19:00:15 Re: About tapes