| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, "k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead |
| Date: | 2020-07-22 04:32:41 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKG+haG0GUzL_dZjRw5UYs1H1tf9kWt9sqUNXiktSvuEQHw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:57 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yeah, that is true but every time before the test the same amount of
> data should be present in shared buffers (or OS cache) if any which
> will help in getting consistent results. However, it is fine to
> reboot the machine as well if that is a convenient way.
We really should have an extension (pg_prewarm?) that knows how to
kick stuff out PostgreSQL's shared buffers and the page cache
(POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | k.jamison@fujitsu.com | 2020-07-22 04:40:53 | RE: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-07-22 03:56:58 | Re: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead |