On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > Finally, I wouldn't believe the results for a moment if they were taken > against databases that are not several times the size of physical RAM > on the test machine, with a total I/O volume also much more than > physical RAM. We are trying to measure the behavior when kernel > caching is not helpful; if the database fits in RAM then you are just > naturally going to get random_page_cost close to 1, because the kernel > will avoid doing any I/O at all.
Um...yeah; another reason to use randread against a raw disk device. (A little hard to use on linux systems, I bet, but works fine on BSD systems.) cjs -- Curt Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
