At 2008-07-12 00:52:42 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > There was some discussion about this change and in fact if you > look at CVS HEAD you'll find it already applied.
Not as far as I can see. > Incrementing the most significant index keys would maximize the > distance we're jumpin around in the index tree. I see. Thanks. > The later versions of mine had a GUC named effective_spindle_count > which I think is nicely abstracted away from the implementation > details. Yes, that does sound much better. (The patch I read had a preread_pages_bitmapscan variable instead.) -- ams -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
