Re: using shared_buffers during seq_scan

From: Rick Otten <rottenwindfish(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Artem Tomyuk <admin(at)leboutique(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: using shared_buffers during seq_scan
Date: 2016-03-17 13:07:08
Message-ID: CAMAYy4KJXbpza61WyO1ssXTV-AnKU1d3xiBprbLc2uuwY1vTzg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

There is parallel sequence scanning coming in 9.6 --
http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2015/11/parallel-sequential-scan-is-committed.html

And there is the GPU extension - https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGStrom

If those aren't options, you'll want your table as much in memory as
possible so your scan doesn't have to to go disk.

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Artem Tomyuk <admin(at)leboutique(dot)com> wrote:

> Hi All!
>
> Is Postgres use shared_buffers during seq_scan?
> In what way i can optimize seq_scan on big tables?
>
> Thanks!
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-03-17 17:20:23 Re: Searching GIN-index (FTS) and sort by timestamp-column
Previous Message Artem Tomyuk 2016-03-17 09:57:13 using shared_buffers during seq_scan