From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Avoiding redundant fetches of btree index metapages |
Date: | 2006-04-26 17:29:13 |
Message-ID: | 1146072553.3120.16.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 12:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > So we would be able to cache other items also?
>
> Only to the extent that you can guarantee a stale cache entry isn't a
> problem. We've already done the analysis involved for the existing
> metapage entries, but anything else would require more thought. (And
> more cache flush events.)
You mean performance tests! Will do.
Methinks that cache flushing is the key to performance for that idea.
> > For that case we'd save N block accesses to locate the rightmost leaf
> > page.
>
> Surely you mean log(N).
Depends what N is. I meant the level, not the number of rows.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2006-04-26 17:31:39 | Re: Regarding TODO item "%Add a separate TRUNCATE permission" |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-26 16:53:55 | Re: Avoiding redundant fetches of btree index metapages |