| From: | Florian Weimer <fw(at)deneb(dot)enyo(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Merge algorithms for large numbers of "tapes" |
| Date: | 2006-03-09 07:20:48 |
| Message-ID: | 87bqwgf5in.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Greg Stark:
> That's one thing that gives me pause about the current approach of
> using more tapes. It seems like ideally the user would create a
> temporary work space on each spindle and the database would arrange
> to use no more than that number of tapes. Then each merge operation
> would involve only sequential access for both reads and writes.
And you'd need to preallocate the files in some way or other, to avoid
file system fragmentation.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-03-09 07:34:34 | Re: problem with large maintenance_work_mem settings and |
| Previous Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2006-03-09 06:53:28 | Re: [HACKERS] Automatic free space map filling |