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

Re: Initial prefetch performance testing

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Initial prefetch performance testing
Date: 2008-10-01 11:02:10
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:

> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 16:46 +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
>> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> > I'd prefer to set this as a tablespace level storage parameter. 
>> Sounds, like a good idea, except... what's a tablespace level storage parameter?
> A storage parameter, just at tablespace level.
> WITH (storage_parameter = value)

I still think this is a good idea but I still think there are unanswered
questions about it. Surely whatever we do with this parameter also holds for
random_page_cost and sequential_page_cost as well? 

Should they remain GUC parameters at all? If so, how would setting any of them
locally interact with the tablespace parameter for tables used in the query? 

  Gregory Stark
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2008-10-01 12:59:33
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous:From: Harald Armin MassaDate: 2008-10-01 09:56:33
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

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