| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Markus Bertheau <twanger(at)bluetwanger(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Eduardo Almeida <edalmeida(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] MySQL vs PG TPC-H benchmarks |
| Date: | 2004-04-22 19:22:51 |
| Message-ID: | 9413.1082661771@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-performance |
Markus Bertheau <twanger(at)bluetwanger(dot)de> writes:
>> You could probably improve the index-create time by temporarily
>> increasing sort_mem. It wouldn't be unreasonable to give CREATE INDEX
>> several hundred meg to work in. (You don't want sort_mem that big
>> normally, because there may be many sorts happening in parallel,
>> but in a data-loading context there'll just be one active sort.)
> Doesn't this provide a reason for CREATE INDEX not to honour sort_mem?
Already done for 7.5.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2004-02/msg00025.php
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-04-22 20:48:54 | Re: Press Release Party |
| Previous Message | Markus Bertheau | 2004-04-22 18:20:47 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] MySQL vs PG TPC-H benchmarks |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2004-04-22 21:16:41 | Re: Setting Shared Buffers , Effective Cache, Sort Mem |
| Previous Message | Pailloncy Jean-Gérard | 2004-04-22 18:46:51 | Re: 225 times slower |