From: | "Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL win32 fragmentation issue |
Date: | 2006-12-03 09:03:12 |
Message-ID: | 65937bea0612030103n76b755bv2bd219e9c7aac7f4@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/3/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> writes:
> > A related point comes to mind, consider the single "tablespace" file for
> > example: It may have no fragmentation from a *file* perspective, but
> > supposing you have several busy relations being inserted or updated then
> > pages (or groups of pages) for these could be "fragmented" throughout
> > the tablespace file.
>
> +1 ... what was said upthread sounds to me like those other databases
> are just hiding the fragmentation issue within their
> huge-files-you-can't-see-into. I would very much like to see some proof
> of performance problems before we worry about this.
>
>
Does this raise the need for an in-postgres de-fragmenter?
--
gurjeet[(dot)singh](at)EnterpriseDB(dot)com
singh(dot)gurjeet(at){ gmail | hotmail | yahoo }.com
GTODO
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-12-03 10:54:05 | Re: PostgreSQL win32 fragmentation issue |
Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2006-12-03 08:56:34 | Re: PostgreSQL win32 fragmentation issue |