Re: effective_io_concurrency

On 30 August 2012 20:28, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> But it might be better yet to make ordinary index scans benefit from
>> effective_io_concurrency, but even if/when that gets done it would
>> probably still be worthwhile to make the planner understand the
>> benefit.
>
> That sounds good too, but separate.

Indeed. The original effective_io_concurrency commit message said:

"""
***SNIP***

(The best way to handle this for plain index scans is still under debate,
so that part is not applied yet --- tgl)
"""

...seems like a pity that this debate never reached a useful conclusion.

Just how helpful is effective_io_concurrency? Did someone produce a
benchmark at some point?

--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services