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

Re: adding support for posix_fadvise()

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: adding support for posix_fadvise()
Date: 2003-11-03 17:17:40
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Neil Conway kirjutas E, 03.11.2003 kell 18:59:
> On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 11:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Why not?  The advice says that you're going to access the data
> > sequentially in the forward direction.  If you're not going to back up,
> > there is no point in keeping pages in cache after they've been read.
> The advice says: "I'm going to read this data sequentially, going
> forward." It doesn't say: "I'm only going to read the data once, and
> then not access it again" (ISTM that's what FADV_NOREUSE is for).

They seem like independent features. 

Can you use combinations like ( FADV_NOREUS | FADV_SEQUENTIAL )

(I obviously have'nt read the spec)


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2003-11-03 17:53:46
Subject: docco on external storage?
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2003-11-03 16:59:24
Subject: Re: adding support for posix_fadvise()

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