Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Ron Peacetree <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?
Date: 2005-10-06 20:25:11
Message-ID: 25400.1128630311@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> Are we awfully worried about people still using 2.0 kernels? And it
> would replace two calls with three in the worst case, we currently
> lseek before every read.

That's utterly false.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2005-10-06 20:33:08 Re: fixing LISTEN/NOTIFY
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-10-06 20:17:21 Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lane Van Ingen 2005-10-06 21:29:42 Need Some Suggestions
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-10-06 20:17:21 Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?