Re: [HACKERS] sort on huge table

Was this resolved?


> >That's what I get for not testing the interaction between logtape.c
> >and buffile.c at a segment boundary --- it didn't work, of course :-(.
> >I rebuilt with a small RELSEG_SIZE and debugged it.  I'm still concerned
> >about possible integer overflow problems, so please update and try again
> >with a large file.
> 
> It worked with 2GB+ table but was much slower than before.
> 
> Before(with 8MB sort memory): 22 minutes
> 
> After(with 8MB sort memory): 1 hour and 5 minutes
> After(with 80MB sort memory): 42 minutes.
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> 
> ************
> 


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026