During recent tuning of the TPC-C workload, I produced the following
patch to force COPY to leave some space in each data block when it loads
data into heap relations.
Rationale for this was to improve performance of random UPDATE
statements against a table too large to fit in memory. That activit
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> During recent tuning of the TPC-C workload, I produced the following
> patch to force COPY to leave some space in each data block when it loads
> data into heap relations.
This is an amazingly ugly way to do it. Put the info into the Relation
structure in
Simon Riggs wrote:
During recent tuning of the TPC-C workload, I produced the following
patch to force COPY to leave some space in each data block when it loads
data into heap relations.
I can't get too excited about incorporating changes designed solely to
improve performance for the workload of
On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 00:00 +1000, Neil Conway wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > During recent tuning of the TPC-C workload, I produced the following
> > patch to force COPY to leave some space in each data block when it loads
> > data into heap relations.
>
> I can't get too excited about incorpora
On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 09:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > During recent tuning of the TPC-C workload, I produced the following
> > patch to force COPY to leave some space in each data block when it loads
> > data into heap relations.
>
> Put the info into th
On T, 2005-04-12 at 18:38 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 09:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
(Neil, I added you to CC: to show you at least two more places where
sparse heaps can be generally useful and not tweaks for single
benchmark)
> > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
My guess is that the FILLFACTOR will actually be a GUC variable rather
than a clause to CREATE INDEX or REINDEX or CLUSTER.
---
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On T, 2005-04-12 at 18:38 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-04-1
On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 02:08 +0300, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > Anyway, when I get time, I'll finish off the patch. Unless other readers
> > would like to follow on.
>
> I hope you will you will get that time before 8.1 ships :)
It's very unlikely, sorry.
I'm working towards improving Business Intel
On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> My guess is that the FILLFACTOR will actually be a GUC variable rather
> than a clause to CREATE INDEX or REINDEX or CLUSTER.
I hope not, but it would be easier to set like that and a lot easier to
code up that way.
Trouble is, if you need
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> My guess is that the FILLFACTOR will actually be a GUC variable rather
>> than a clause to CREATE INDEX or REINDEX or CLUSTER.
> I hope not, but it would be easier to set like that and a lot easier
Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> My guess is that the FILLFACTOR will actually be a GUC variable rather
> >> than a clause to CREATE INDEX or REINDEX or CLUSTER.
>
> > I hope not, but it would be easier to se
On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> My guess is that the FILLFACTOR will actually be a GUC variable rather
> >> than a clause to CREATE INDEX or REINDEX or CLUSTER.
>
> > I hop
12 matches
Mail list logo
