Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Claudio Freire
Subject Re: ANALYZE sampling is too good
Date
Msg-id CAGTBQpbXp9wrPnNm7QAGm5BTeorxyF0ce7-6hrBv9cYDC4iakQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to ANALYZE sampling is too good  (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
> Worse, my experience with the posix_fadvise benchmarking is that on
> spinning media reading one out of every 16 blocks takes about the same
> time as reading them all. Presumably this is because the seek time
> between tracks dominates and reading one out of every 16 blocks is
> still reading every track. So in fact if your table is up to about
> 3-4G ANALYZE is still effectively going to do a full table scan, at
> least as far as I/O time goes.


Actually, it's rotational latency the dominant cost there.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: variant of regclass
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: UNNEST with multiple args, and TABLE with multiple funcs