Re: [HACKERS] \dt and disk access - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] \dt and disk access
Date
Msg-id 7e7657a02909c3a0f4de85df08f9d98a
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] \dt and disk access  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > Permission to put this in 6.1p1?
>
>     By all means...

Thomas says no for 6.1p1.  I have no opinion on this.  However, I don't
want to rush out a fix until I have heard from Paul M. Aoki and Vadim,
and gotten their opinion for the most efficient way to fix this.

>
>     My next question is what is considered a 'small SELECT result'?  If
> I have a 32Meg machine, that 'small' would be different, I would assume,
> then a 128Meg machine.

I think the sort is used by ORDER BY and joins where this is not an
existing index.

>     With that in mind, how about some sort of 'switch', similar to
> -B, that allows you to stipulate total RAM of a machine (or virtual memory?),
> or something similar to that?

I am not sure how to do this.  There is sysctl() and getconf(), but
neither of them is standard on all platforms.

- --
Bruce Momjian
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us

------------------------------

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] \dt and disk access
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] \dt and disk access