| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Closing some 8.4 open items |
| Date: | 2009-04-08 17:10:20 |
| Message-ID: | 49DCDA7C.1030605@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/8/09 9:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> What about seq scans?
>
> If the kernel can't read-ahead a seqscan by itself, it's unlikely to
> be smart enough to be helped by posix_fadvise ... or at least so I
> would think. Do you have reason to think differently?
Well, Solaris 10 + UFS should be helped by fadvise -- in theory at
least, it would eliminate the need to modify your mount points for
better readahead when setting up a PG-Solaris server. Solaris-UFS quite
lazy about readahead. Zdenek, Jignesh?
You're probably correct about Linux and FreeBSD. I don't know if OSX +
HFS supports fadvise. If so, it could only help; readahead on HFS right
now is nonexistant.
Presumably fadvise is useless on Windows. Anyone know?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2009-04-08 17:22:01 | Re: Closing some 8.4 open items |
| Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2009-04-08 16:53:18 | Re: A renewed plea for inclusion of zone.tab |