Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > One of the main reasons for the implementation was to allow larger
> > queries to work faster by utilising multiple temp tablespaces for the
> > same query.
> 
> > The original ideal implementation was to use round-robin/cyclic
> > selection, which allows much better usage in the above case.
> 
> Really?  What if multiple backends are all hitting the same tablespaces
> in the same order?  A random selection seems much less likely to risk
> having any self-synchronizing behavior.

I thought it was going to be random selection for the first tablespace,
and round-robin after that.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>          http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                               http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Reply via email to