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

Re: Index/Function organized table layout

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: James Rogers <jamesr(at)best(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index/Function organized table layout
Date: 2003-10-01 16:29:50
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:37:38AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> James Rogers <jamesr(at)best(dot)com> writes:

> > Both of these things really are attempts to address the same basic problem,
> > which is optimizing the number of buffers a given query uses by making the
> > tables layout reflect typical queries.
> Hm, are you sure that smarter buffer management wouldn't serve the
> purpose?

It doesn't help when there a lot of access locality in searching.  In my
case I want to select some thousands of records that were inserted very
apart from each other, but are logically very near.  Having this
pseudoheap that is ordered by definition helps very much with the
selection; the current heap requires me to bring to buffers lots of
uninteresting tuples, whichever buffer management algorithm is used,
because they are in the same page as interesting tuples.

Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]>)
"Linux transformó mi computadora, de una `máquina para hacer cosas',
en un aparato realmente entretenido, sobre el cual cada día aprendo
algo nuevo" (Jaime Salinas)

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2003-10-01 16:30:31
Subject: Re: Thoughts on maintaining 7.3
Previous:From: Yanhong.Li-1Date: 2003-10-01 16:15:39

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