Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1yQujSOjbu29r23LWH3HM-gPAv7X0FQwaxP86v_RZkMwQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>
>> Earlier you said that this should be an ideal setup for IOS.  But it
>> isn't really--the ideal set up is one in which the alternative to an
>> IOS is a regular index scan which makes many uncached scattered reads
>> into the heap.  I don't think that that situation can't really be
>> engineered with a where-less query.
>
> Can you give me some suggested comparisons which *would* be ideal, then?

Are you looking for vaguely real-life examples, or highly contrived
examples used to dissect the server?

For vaguely real life, take your example of pgbench -i -s200 -F 50,
and I have 2Gig RAM, which seems to be the same as you do.

With select only work load (pgbench -S -M prepared -T 30), I get

tps = 193

But now enable index-only scans:

psql -c "create index on pgbench_accounts(aid, abalance);"

and it goes up to.

tps = 10137

Cheers,

Jeff


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?
Next
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is indexonlyscan so darned slow?