Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (

From: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
To: "Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
Cc: "Dave Cramer" <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "Joshua Marsh" <icub3d(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Date: 2005-11-19 00:05:59
Message-ID: BFA3AC67.14125%llonergan@greenplum.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Mark,

On 11/18/05 3:46 PM, "Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> wrote:

> If you alter this to involve more complex joins (e.g 4. way star) and
> (maybe add a small number of concurrent executors too) - is it still the
> case?

I may not have listened to you - are you asking about whether the readahead
works for these cases?

I¹ll be running some massive TPC-H benchmarks on these machines soon ­ we¹ll
see then.

- Luke

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-11-19 00:06:20 Re: ERROR: no value found for parameter 1 with JDBC and Explain Analyze
Previous Message Luke Lonergan 2005-11-19 00:04:00 Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (