Re: Threaded Sorting

Well, that's why I was soliciting developer input as to exactly what
goes on with sorts. From what I seem to be hearing, all sorts result in
temp files being created and/or used. If that's the case then yes, I
can understand the fixation. Of course that opens the door for it being
a horrible implementation. If that's not the case, then parallel sorts
still seem like a rather obvious route to look into.

Greg

On Fri, 2002-10-04 at 14:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Greg Copeland wrote:
> -- Start of PGP signed section.
> > I see. I just always assumed that it would be done as part of table
> > space effort as it's such a defacto feature.
> >
> > I am curious as to why no one has commented on the other rather obvious
> > performance enhancement which was brought up in this thread. Allowing
> > for parallel sorting seems rather obvious and is a common enhancement
> > yet seems to of been completely dismissed as people seem to be fixated
> > on I/O. Go figure.
>
> We think we are fixated on I/O because we think that is where the delay
> is. Is there a reason we shouldn't think that?
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073