Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD
Subject Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
Date
Msg-id E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA5797F0067@m0143.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?  (Ron Peacetree <rjpeace@earthlink.net>)
Responses Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
List pgsql-hackers
> Now I've asked for the quickest path to detailed
> understanding of the pg IO subsystem.  The goal being to get
> more up to speed on its coding details.  Certainly not to
> annoy you or anyone else.

Basically pg does random 8k (compile time blocksize) reads/writes only.
Bitmap and sequential scans read 8k blocks in order.
Only WAL does n x 8k writes with one system call.

pg relys on the OS readahead (== larger block IO) to do efficient IO.
Basically the pg scan performance should match a dd if=file of=/dev/null
bs=8k,
unless CPU bound.

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andreas Pflug
Date:
Subject: version dependent compilation
Next
From: Gaetano Mendola
Date:
Subject: Outer where pushed down