| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Luke Lonergan" <LLonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "CK(dot)Tan" <cktan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seq scans roadmap |
| Date: | 2007-05-16 08:31:30 |
| Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA5790211F032@m0143.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > > > 32 buffers = 1MB with 32KB blocksize, which spoils the CPU L2
> > > > cache effect.
I'd say in a scenario where 32k pages are indicated you will also want
larger than average L2 caches.
> > > >
> > > > How about using 256/blocksize?
The reading ahead uses 1/4 ring size. To the best of our knowledge, this
1/4 needs to be 128k for reading.
So I'd say we need 512/blocksize.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2007-05-16 11:03:49 | Re: Not ready for 8.3 |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2007-05-16 08:26:47 | Re: Windows Vista support (Buildfarm Vaquita) |