About tapes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From mac_man2005@hotmail.it
Subject About tapes
Date
Msg-id BLU0-SMTP7902622414A2DDE6E2A978E6C00@phx.gbl
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: About tapes  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi to all.<br /><br /> Please take a look at the initial comment contained into the logtape.c file:<br /><a
href="http://doxygen.postgresql.org/logtape_8c-source.html">http://doxygen.postgresql.org/logtape_8c-source.html</a><br
/><br/> Almost at the beginning of that file, it is affirmed that <span>implementing tapes on disk (quote: <i>by
creatinga separate file for each "tape"</i>) will require more space than implementing merge on tapes
themselves.</span><br/> Now, taking in account that tuplesort.c and logtape.c actually DO implement tapes on disk, in
whichcase it would require between 2x and 4x the input space?<br /><br /> Thanks for your attention.<br /> Best
regards.<br/><br /> Manolo<br /> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: extensible enum types
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: About tapes