Re: Seq scans roadmap

From: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, "CK Tan" <cktan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Seq scans roadmap
Date: 2007-05-12 15:42:40
Message-ID: C26B2E80.2FE95%llonergan@greenplum.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Simon,

On 5/12/07 12:35 AM, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

> I'm slightly worried that the results for COPY aren't anywhere near as
> good as the SELECT and VACUUM results. It isn't clear from those numbers
> that the benefit really is significant.

COPY is bottlenecked on datum formation and format translation with very low
performance, so I don't think we should expect the ring buffer to make much
of a dent.

- Luke

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Wieck 2007-05-12 20:53:38 Use of ActiveSnapshot
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2007-05-12 07:35:27 Re: Seq scans roadmap