On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: > From my attempted reading of the thread "posix_fadvise v22", it seems > like modification of the planner was never discussed, rather than > being discussed and rejected. So, is there a reason not to make the > planner take account of effective_io_concurrency?
Not that I can see. > But it might be better yet to make ordinary index scans benefit from > effective_io_concurrency, but even if/when that gets done it would > probably still be worthwhile to make the planner understand the > benefit. That sounds good too, but separate. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
