Re: [HACKERS] sort on huge table

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] sort on huge table
Date: 1999-11-30 02:02:40
Message-ID: 199911300202.VAA21215@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Was this resolved?

> >That's what I get for not testing the interaction between logtape.c
> >and buffile.c at a segment boundary --- it didn't work, of course :-(.
> >I rebuilt with a small RELSEG_SIZE and debugged it. I'm still concerned
> >about possible integer overflow problems, so please update and try again
> >with a large file.
>
> It worked with 2GB+ table but was much slower than before.
>
> Before(with 8MB sort memory): 22 minutes
>
> After(with 8MB sort memory): 1 hour and 5 minutes
> After(with 80MB sort memory): 42 minutes.
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
>
> ************
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-11-30 02:07:12 Re: [HACKERS] Bizarre coding in _bt_binsrch
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-11-30 01:52:56 Re: [HACKERS] indexable and locale