Ron Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>   Does running a query only twice really insure that a result is cached?
>   It seems not to be the case for seq-scans on Linux.

Should work for tables small enough to fit into the shared_buffers
arena.  I wouldn't necessarily assume it for large tables.

Note that what I was really doing was taking the timing measurement
again on data cached by the *first* run, so that I would have something
that could fairly be compared to the following EXPLAIN ANALYZE --- which
of course would likewise be operating on cached data.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
       match

Reply via email to