Re: Extended Prefetching using Asynchronous IO - proposal and patch

From: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, John Lumby <johnlumby(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Extended Prefetching using Asynchronous IO - proposal and patch
Date: 2014-05-29 13:28:27
Message-ID: CAGTBQpbAKN6cnxi3VeqoW=zya3iXma74mnD1dG019b8ywsS9sA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

El 28/05/2014 22:12, "Peter Geoghegan" <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> escribió:
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> > For nestloop, correct me if I'm wrong, but index scan nodes don't have
> > visibility of the next tuple to be searched for.
>
> Nested loop joins are considered a particularly compelling case for
> prefetching, actually.

Of course. I only doubt it can be implemented without not so small changes
to all execution nodes.

I'll look into it

>
> --
> Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-05-29 13:45:27 Re: [PATCH] Replacement for OSSP-UUID for Linux and BSD
Previous Message Andres Freund 2014-05-29 13:25:35 Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgsql: Fix bogus %name-prefix option syntax in all our Bison files.