Re: again on index usage
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: again on index usage |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 546.1010776161@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: again on index usage (mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: again on index usage
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com> writes: > ... Storage > devices are now black boxes. The only predictable advantage a > "sequential scan" can have on a modern computer is OS level caching. You mean read-ahead. True enough, but that "only advantage" is very significant. The 4.0 number did not come out of the air, it came from actual measurements. I think the real point in this thread is that measurements on an idle system might not extrapolate very well to measurements on a heavily loaded system. I can see the point, but I don't really have time to investigate it right now. I'd be willing to reduce the default value of random_page_cost to something around 2, if someone can come up with experimental evidence justifying it ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: