Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?

From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?
Date: 2005-10-05 09:43:15
Message-ID: 20051005094315.GX2241@mathom.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 12:43:10AM +0300, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>Just FYI, I run a count(*) on a 15.6GB table on a lightly loaded db and
>it run in 163 sec. (Dual opteron 2.6GHz, 6GB RAM, 6 x 74GB 15k disks in
>RAID10, reiserfs). A little less than 100MB sec.

And none of that 15G table is in the 6G RAM?

Mike Stone

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2005-10-05 10:32:52 Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
Previous Message Michael Stone 2005-10-05 09:41:25 Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2005-10-05 10:32:52 Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
Previous Message Michael Stone 2005-10-05 09:41:25 Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?