Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Date
Msg-id 20060922140228.GX28987@nasby.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-performance
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 11:05:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> We tried posix_fadvise() during the 8.2 development cycle, but had
> problems as outlined in a comment in xlog.c:
>
>     /*
>      * posix_fadvise is problematic on many platforms: on older x86 Linux
>      * it just dumps core, and there are reports of problems on PPC platforms
>      * as well.  The following is therefore disabled for the time being.
>      * We could consider some kind of configure test to see if it's safe to
>      * use, but since we lack hard evidence that there's any useful performance
>      * gain to be had, spending time on that seems unprofitable for now.
>      */

In case it's not clear, that's a call for someone to do some performance
testing. :)

Bruce, you happen to have a URL for a patch to put fadvise in?
--
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
Next
From: "Alex Turner"
Date:
Subject: Confusion and Questions about blocks read