From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: index prefetching |
Date: | 2024-01-16 17:08:14 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobosbwUekt15RtRseMd-Y_Zv2rUWjCq+ZSwDwXy7sFvUg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 11:25 AM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > 3. It doesn't perform prefetch of leave pages for IOS, only referenced
> > heap pages which are not marked as all-visible. It seems to me that if
> > optimized has chosen IOS (and not bitmap heap scan for example), then
> > there should be large enough fraction for all-visible pages. Also index
> > prefetch is most efficient for OLAp queries and them are used to be
> > performance for historical data which is all-visible. But IOS can be
> > really handled separately in some other PR. Frankly speaking combining
> > prefetch of leave B-Tree pages and referenced heap pages seems to be
> > very challenged task.
>
> I see prefetching of leaf pages as interesting / worthwhile improvement,
> but out of scope for this patch. I don't think it can be done at the
> executor level - the prefetch requests need to be submitted from the
> index AM code (by calling PrefetchBuffer, etc.)
+1. This is a good feature, and so is that, but they're not the same
feature, despite the naming problems.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Maiquel Grassi | 2024-01-16 17:08:24 | RE: New Window Function: ROW_NUMBER_DESC() OVER() ? |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-01-16 17:06:43 | Re: ALTER TYPE OWNER fails to recurse to multirange |