Re: limiting hint bit I/O
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: limiting hint bit I/O |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10078.1295034663@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: limiting hint bit I/O (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: limiting hint bit I/O
Re: limiting hint bit I/O |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Freezing sooner isn't likely to reduce I/O compared to hint bits. �What >> that does is create I/O that you *have* to execute ... both in the pages >> themselves, and in WAL. > It depends on which way you tilt your head - right now, we rewrite > each table 3x - once to populate, once to hint, and once to freeze. > If the table is doomed to survive long enough to go through all three > of those, then freezing is better than hinting. Of course, that's not > always the case, but people keep complaining about the way this shakes > out. The people whose tables are mostly insert-only complain about it, but that's not the majority of our userbase IMO. We just happen to have a couple of particularly vocal ones, like Berkus. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: