Re: : Performance Improvement Strategy

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: : Performance Improvement Strategy
Date: 2011-10-06 19:20:51
Message-ID: CAOR=d=1HNVVnsADVngt+Kj7L0rpyCfyvL5oLkxOj7jsq9ZVcqg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> It used to be that cluster on a very randomly ordered table was much
>> slower than doing something like select * into newtable from oldtable
>> order by col1, col2;  Is that still the case in 9.0/9.1?
>
> Fixed in 9.1, per release notes:
>
>        * Allow CLUSTER to sort the table rather than scanning the index when it seems likely to be cheaper (Leonardo Francalanci)

Looks like I owe Leonardo Francalanci a pizza.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mark 2011-10-07 03:22:12 Re: pg9 replication over WAN ?
Previous Message Raghavendra 2011-10-06 09:31:23 Re: : Performance Improvement Strategy