From: | Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Tuplesort merge pre-reading |
Date: | 2016-09-12 00:34:48 |
Message-ID: | 6f410b28-d16e-732c-7dff-6486d210ef7d@archidevsys.co.nz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/09/16 12:16, Gavin Flower wrote:
[...]
> two blocks would be logically adjacent (which means they are likely
> to be physically close together, but not guaranteed!).
>
[...]
Actual disk layouts are quite complicated, the above is an over
simplification, but the message is still valid.
There are various tricks of disc layout ( & low level handling) that can
be used to minimise the time taken to read 2 blocks that are logically
adjacent. I had to know this stuff for discs that MainFrame computers
used in the 1980's - modern disk systems are way more complicated, but
the conclusions are still valid.
I am extremely glad that I no longer have to concern myself with
understanding the precise low stuff on discs these days - there is no
longer a one-to-one correspondence of what the O/S thinks is a disk
block, with how the data is physically recorded on the disc.
Cheers,
Gavin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2016-09-12 00:51:13 | CommitFest 2016-09 status summary |
Previous Message | Gavin Flower | 2016-09-12 00:16:23 | Re: Tuplesort merge pre-reading |