Re: How is random_page_cost=4 ok?

On Oct 10, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Nikolas Everett wrote:
> In any case your experience doesn't match mine. On a machine with a  
> sizable
> raid controller setting random_page_cost higher does generate, as  
> expected,
> plans with more bitmap heap scans which are in fact faster.
>
> We're running postgres backed by a NetApp 3020 via fiber and have  
> had a lot of success setting random page cost very high (10).   
> Sequential reads are just that much faster.  I'm not sure if thats  
> because we've configured something wrong or what, but thats a  
> really useful knob for us.


Is your workload OLTP or OLAP? Promoting seqscans in an OLTP  
environment seems to be a really bad idea to me...
-- 
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect  decibel@decibel.org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828