Re: limiting hint bit I/O
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: limiting hint bit I/O |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTi=3Bymmtr30GsJwTz_-KsTT6yLY5VAWSMsCtFN+@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: limiting hint bit I/O (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > 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. True. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: