| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Georgios <gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: index prefetching |
| Date: | 2025-08-15 19:31:47 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmMN6=6e0e8c8tVUXxpGdYXGRjAUoG-CR_z6xR7kTAnsA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:28 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> >I'm not worried about it. Andres' "not waiting for already-in-progress
> >IO" patch was clearly just a prototype. Just thought it was worth
> >noting here.
>
> Are you confident in that? Because the patch should be extremely cheap in that case.
I'm pretty confident.
> What precisely were you testing?
I'm just running my usual generic pgbench SELECT script, with my usual
settings (so no direct I/O, but with iouring).
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2025-08-15 19:38:31 | Re: index prefetching |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-08-15 19:28:01 | Re: index prefetching |