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

Re: adding support for posix_fadvise()

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>,PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: adding support for posix_fadvise()
Date: 2003-11-03 15:44:43
Message-ID: 1067874283.3089.241.camel@tokyo (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 10:01, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> > POSIX_FADV_RANDOM doesn't effect the page cache, it just determines how
> > aggressive the kernel is when doing readahead (at least on Linux, but
> > I'd expect to see other kernels implement similar behavior).
> I would expect POSIX_FADV_SEQUENTIAL to reduce the chance that a page
> will be kept in buffer cache after it's been used.

I don't think that can be reasonably implied from the POSIX text, which
is merely:

        Specifies that the application expects to access the specified
        data sequentially from lower offsets to higher offsets.

The present Linux implementation doesn't do this, AFAICS -- all it does
it increase the readahead for this file:


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-11-03 15:47:04
Subject: Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM
Previous:From: Jan WieckDate: 2003-11-03 15:33:21
Subject: Experimental ARC implementation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group