On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 02:54:06PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> SSD: good question.
>
> Here's an rackspace VM with PG9.6.6, 2GB shared_buffers, 8GB RAM (~4GB of
> which
> is being used as OS page cache), and 32GB SSD (with random_page_cost=1). The
> server is in use by our application.
>
> I
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 02:54:06PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> SSD: good question.
>
> Here's an rackspace VM with PG9.6.6, 2GB shared_buffers, 8GB RAM (~4GB of
> which
> is being used as OS page cache), and 32GB SSD (with random_page_cost=1). The
> server is in use by our application.
>
> I
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 01:29:48AM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 01:50:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > In any case, given that we do this calculation without regard
> > > to any specific index,
> >
> > One solution is
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 01:50:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Jeff Janes writes:
> > > On Dec 3, 2017 15:31, "Tom Lane" wrote:
> > >> Jeff Janes writes:
> > >>> But I do see that ties within the logical order of the column values
> are
> >
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 01:50:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Janes writes:
> > On Dec 3, 2017 15:31, "Tom Lane" wrote:
> >> Jeff Janes writes:
> >>> But I do see that ties within the logical order of the column values are
> >>> broken to agree with the physical order. That is wrong, right?
