Re: Hash partitioning.

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: Hash partitioning.
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1x0VBcNhunxF_qkVbOOSYvakpUi4O1aRBQKZHkR-U7f_Q@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Hash partitioning.  (Nicolas Barbier <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Nicolas Barbier <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com> wrote:

My reasoning was: To determine which index block to update (typically
one in both the partitioned and non-partitioned cases), one needs to
walk the index first, which supposedly causes one additional (read)
I/O in the non-partitioned case on average, because there is one extra
level and the lower part of the index is not cached (because of the
size of the index).

But the "extra level" is up at the top where it is well cached, not at the bottom where it is not.

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: changeset generation v5-01 - Patches & git tree
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: updated emacs configuration