On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 16:46 +0100, Gregory Stark wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 04:57 -0400, Greg Smith wrote: > > > >> -As Greg Stark suggested, the larger the spindle count the larger the > >> speedup, and the larger the prefetch size that might make sense. His > >> suggestion to model the user GUC as "effective_spindle_count" looks like a > >> good one. The sequential scan fadvise implementation patch submitted uses > >> the earlier preread_pages name for that parameter, which I agree seems > >> less friendly. > > > > Good news about the testing. > > > > I'd prefer to set this as a tablespace level storage parameter. > > Sounds, like a good idea, except... what's a tablespace level storage > parameter?
A storage parameter, just at tablespace level. WITH (storage_parameter = value) -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
