Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Register
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
P
postgres-lambda-diff
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Wiki
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Snippets
Build
Pipelines
Jobs
Pipeline schedules
Artifacts
Deploy
Releases
Container Registry
Model registry
Operate
Environments
Monitor
Incidents
Analyze
Value stream analytics
Contributor analytics
CI/CD analytics
Repository analytics
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
Jakob Huber
postgres-lambda-diff
Commits
c1d9df4f
Commit
c1d9df4f
authored
13 years ago
by
Bruce Momjian
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
Document random page cost is only 4x seqeuntial, and not 40x.
parent
ef7a7c81
No related branches found
Branches containing commit
No related tags found
Tags containing commit
No related merge requests found
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
+20
-0
20 additions, 0 deletions
doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
with
20 additions
and
0 deletions
doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
+
20
−
0
View file @
c1d9df4f
...
...
@@ -2604,6 +2604,26 @@ SET ENABLE_SEQSCAN TO OFF;
parameters.
</para>
<para>
Random access to mechanical disk storage is normally much more expensive
than four-times sequential access. However, a lower default is used
(4.0) because the majority of random accesses to disk, such as indexed
reads, are assumed to be in cache. The default value can be thought of
as modeling random access as 40 times slower than sequential, while
expecting 90% of random reads to be cached.
</para>
<para>
If you believe a 90% cache rate is an incorrect assumption
for your workload, you can increase random_page_cost to better
reflect the true cost of random storage reads. Correspondingly,
if your data is likely to be completely in cache, such as when
the database is smaller than the total server memory, decreasing
random_page_cost can be appropriate. Storage that has a low random
read cost relative to sequential, e.g. solid-state drives, might
also be better modeled with a lower value for random_page_cost.
</para>
<tip>
<para>
Although the system will let you set <varname>random_page_cost</> to
...
...
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment