On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Heck, even RAM isn't 1.0. I'm also involved with the Redis project, > which is an in-memory database. Even for a pure-RAM database, it turns > out that just using linked lists and 100% random access is slower than > accessing page images.
That's a slightly different problem, though. Sequential vs. random access is about whether fetching pages n, n+1, n+2, ... is faster than skipping around, not whether accessing fewer pages is faster than more. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
