> I bet you've mis-diagnosed the problem. Btrees don't have a problem > keeping up with 50m records; you're problem is that after a certain > point your page cache can't keep up with the pseudo-random i/o > patterns and you start seeing faults to storage. > [...] This has nothing to do the btree algorithm except to the > extent it affects i/o patterns.
Of course; that's why those "different" index types aim to use more sequential than random writes. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
