Re: mosbench revisited

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: mosbench revisited
Дата
Msg-id 22145.1312400330@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: mosbench revisited  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: mosbench revisited  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On a straight pgbench -S test, you get four system calls per query:
> recvfrom(), lseek(), lseek(), sendto().  Adding -M prepared eliminates
> the two lseeks.

[ scratches head... ]  Two?  Is that one for the table and one for its
lone index, or are we being redundant there?

(If the query ended up being a seqscan, I'd expect a second
lseek(SEEK_END) when the executor starts up, but I gather from the other
complaints that the mosbench people were only testing simple indexscan
queries.)
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Transient plans versus the SPI API
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Further news on Clang - spurious warnings