Re: Warm-cache prefetching

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Luke Lonergan <LLonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Warm-cache prefetching
Date: 2005-12-09 22:14:34
Message-ID: 8652.1134166474@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Luke Lonergan wrote:
>> It (the compute intensity optimization) is what we did for copy parsing, and it sped up by a factor of 100+.

> The changes made to COPY were portable, though.

In fact, the changes made to COPY had absolutely nada to do with any of
the things discussed in this thread.

BTW, "sped up by 100%" (which is already an overstatement of what was
actually accomplished) is a long way from "sped up by a factor of 100".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Luke Lonergan 2005-12-09 22:19:37 Re: Warm-cache prefetching
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2005-12-09 21:41:58 Re: Warm-cache prefetching