| From: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Postgres <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: posix_fadvise v22 |
| Date: | 2009-01-02 19:25:47 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.64.0901021416310.15834@westnet.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
> ISTM that you *should* be able to see an improvement on even
> single-spindle systems, due to better overlapping of CPU and I/O effort.
The earlier synthetic tests I did:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-09/msg01401.php
Showed a substantial speedup even in the single spindle case on a couple
of systems, but one didn't really seem to benefit. So we could theorize
that Robert's test system is more like that one. If someone can help out
with making a more formal test case showing this in action, I'll dig into
the details of what's different between that system and the others.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2009-01-02 19:42:56 | Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4? |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-01-02 19:20:17 | Re: Documenting serializable vs snapshot isolation levels |