| From: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Seq scans status update |
| Date: | 2007-05-18 05:38:01 |
| Message-ID: | C27289C9.30916%llonergan@greenplum.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Hi Heikki,
On 5/17/07 10:28 AM, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> is also visible on larger scans that don't fit in cache with bigger I/O
> hardware, and this patch would increase the max. I/O throughput that we
> can handle on such hardware. I don't have such hardware available, I
> hope someone else will try that.
Yes, this is absolutely the case, in addition to the benefits of not
polluting the bufcache with seq scans (as discussed in detail previously).
We've adopted this (see CK's patch) with excellent benefits.
We can try your version on a machine with fast I/O and get back to you with
a comparison of this and CK's version.
- Luke
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2007-05-18 05:43:23 | Re: Updateable cursors patch |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2007-05-18 04:54:34 | Re: Maintaining cluster order on insert |