On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > Claudio Freire <klaussfre...@gmail.com> wrote: >>On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >><hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: >>> I took a stab at using posix_fadvise() in ANALYZE. It turned out to >>be very >>> easy, patch attached. Your mileage may vary, but I'm seeing a nice >>gain from >>> this on my laptop. Taking a 30000 page sample of a table with 717717 >>pages >>> (ie. slightly larger than RAM), ANALYZE takes about 6 seconds without >>the >>> patch, and less than a second with the patch, with >>> effective_io_concurrency=10. If anyone with a good test data set >>loaded >>> would like to test this and post some numbers, that would be great. >> >>Kernel version? > > 3.12, from Debian experimental. With an ssd drive and btrfs filesystem. > Admittedly not your average database server setup, so it would be nice to get > more reports from others.
Yeah, read-ahead isn't relevant for SSD. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
