Re: pb with big volumes

On 8/10/23 23:40, David Rowley wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 at 13:54, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Wouldn't IO contention make for additive timings instead of exponential?
> No, not necessarily. Imagine one query running that's doing a
> parameterised nested loop join resulting in the index on the inner
> side being descended several, say, million times. Let's say there's
> *just* enough RAM/shared buffers so that the index pages, once the
> index is scanned the first time, all the required pages are cached
> which results in no I/O on subsequent index scans. Now, imagine
> another similar query but with another index, let's say this index
> also *just* fits in cache. Now, when these two queries run
> concurrently, they each evict buffers the other one uses. Of course,
> the shared buffers code is written in such a way as to try and evict
> lesser used buffers first, but if they're all used about the same
> amount, then this can stuff occur. The slowdown isn't linear.

But that's cache thrashing (which was OP's concern), not IO contention.

--
Born in Arizona, moved to Babylonia.