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

Re: Optimizer internals

From: Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Jonah H(dot) Harris <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "Mark Lewis" <mark(dot)lewis(at)mir3(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)lusis(dot)org, "PGSQL Performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Optimizer internals
Date: 2006-06-17 19:33:17
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Jun 16, 2006, at 8:43 AM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> Yes, this is certainly the most noticible case.  This is one reason
> I'm behind the freespace patch.  Unfortunately, a lot of inexperienced
> people use VACUUM FULL and don't understand why VACUUM is *generally*
> better.(to free up block-level freespace and update FSM) assuming they
> have enough hard disk space for the database.

Another reason to turn autovac on by default in 8.2...

>> That and of course the visibility bitmap that has been
>> much-discussed
> I'd certainly like to see it.

What's the hold-up on this? I thought there were some technical  
issues that had yet to be resolved?

BTW, I'll point out that DB2 and MSSQL didn't switch to MVCC until  
their most recent versions.
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software    work: 512-231-6117
vcard:       cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jim NasbyDate: 2006-06-17 19:53:03
Subject: Re: SAN performance mystery
Previous:From: Jim NasbyDate: 2006-06-17 19:25:14
Subject: Re: Precomputed constants?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group