| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
| Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: merge>hash>loop |
| Date: | 2006-04-19 05:25:28 |
| Message-ID: | 22250.1145424328@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> writes:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> Good point. :/ I'm guessing there's no easy way to see how many blocks
>> for a given relation are in shared memory, either...
> contrib/pg_buffercache will tell you this -
I think the key word in Jim's comment was "easy", ie, cheap. Grovelling
through many thousands of buffers to count the matches to a given
relation doesn't sound appetizing, especially not if it gets done over
again several times during each query-planning cycle. Trying to keep
centralized counts somewhere would be even worse (because of locking/
contention issues).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2006-04-19 05:31:21 | Re: Blocks read for index scans |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-04-19 05:18:35 | Re: merge>hash>loop |