On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 21:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> So I'm concluding that we can easily afford to switch to
> tuplestore-always operation, especially if we are willing to put any
> effort into tuplestore optimization. (I note that the current
> tuplestore code writes 24 bytes per row for this example, which is a
> shade on the high side for only 4 bytes payload. It looks like it
> would be pretty easy to knock 10 bytes off that for a 40% savings in
> I/O volume.)
That seems like an important, possibly more important, change.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support