Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> writes:
> The backwards scan is awful for rotating media. The reading from the
> end and writing to the beginning is bad too, though hopefully the
> cache can help that.
Yeah. And all that pales in comparison to what happens in the indexes.
You have to insert index entries (retail) for each moved-in tuple,
then after doing the intermediate commit you run around and remove
the index entries for the moved-off tuples. Lots of nonsequential
access to insert the entries. The cleanup isn't so bad --- it's
comparable to what regular lazy VACUUM has to do --- but that's just
one step in a very expensive process.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
