Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Guy Thornley
Тема Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Дата
Msg-id 20060922025209.GO6211@esphion.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as  (Markus Schaber <schabi@logix-tt.com>)
Ответы Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Список pgsql-performance
> >> I thought that posix_fadvise() with POSIX_FADV_WILLNEED was exactly
> >> meant for this purpose?
> >
> > This is a good idea - I wasn't aware that this was possible.
>
> This possibility was the reason for me to propose it. :-)

posix_fadvise() features in the TODO list already; I'm not sure if any work
on it has been done for pg8.2.

Anyway, I understand that POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED on a linux 2.6 kernel allows
pages to be discarded from memory earlier than usual. This is useful, since
it means you can prevent your seqscan from nuking the OS cache.

Of course you could argue the OS should be able to detect this, and prevent
it occuring anyway. I don't know anything about linux's behaviour in this
area.

.Guy

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Luke Lonergan"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as