From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "Nikolas Everett" <nik9000(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Why does this query write to the disk? |
Date: | 2008-09-18 18:13:20 |
Message-ID: | 23587.1221761600@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> "Nikolas Everett" <nik9000(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm a bit confused as to why this query writes to the disk:
> It's probably writing hint bits to improve performance of subsequent
> access to the table. The issue is discussed here:
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Hint_Bits
Hint-bit updates wouldn't be WAL-logged. If the table has been around a
long time, it might be freezing old tuples, which *would* be WAL-logged
(since 8.2 or so) --- but that would be a one-time, non-repeatable
behavior. How sure are you that there was WAL output?
What I was thinking was more likely was that the hash table for the hash
join was spilling out to temp files. That wouldn't be WAL-logged
either, but depending on your tablespace setup it might result in I/O on
some other disk than the table proper.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Carey | 2008-09-18 18:30:23 | Re: Why does this query write to the disk? |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2008-09-18 17:49:48 | Re: Why does this query write to the disk? |