Re: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :(
От | Michal Mosiewicz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :( |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3562C89F.21893FD5@interdata.com.pl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :( (The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :(
RE: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :( |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
The Hermit Hacker wrote: > Now, as a text file, this would amount to, what...~50MB? 40M of records to produce a 50MB text file? How would you sort such a *compressed* file? ;-) > So, if I were to do a 'copy out' to a text file, a Unix sort and then a > 'copy in', I would use up *less* disk space (by several orders of > magnitude) then doing the sort inside of PostgreSQL? Well, I think it might be optimised slightly. Am I right that postgres uses heap (i.e. they look like tables) files during sorting? While this is a merge sort, those files doesn't have to be a table-like files. Certainly, they might variable length records without pages (aren't they used sequentially). Moreover we would consider packing tape files before writting them down if necessary. Of course it will result in some performance dropdown. However it's better to have less performance that being unable to sort it at all. Last question... What's the purpose of such a big sort? If somebody gets 40M of sorted records in a result of some query, what would he do with it? Is he going to spent next years on reading this lecture? I mean, isn't it worth to query the database for necessary informations only and then sort it? Mike -- WWW: http://www.lodz.pdi.net/~mimo tel: Int. Acc. Code + 48 42 148340 add: Michal Mosiewicz * Bugaj 66 m.54 * 95-200 Pabianice * POLAND
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: