On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 15:14 +0900, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
> Even if it is off, DSM are always recorded and updated.

The purpose of the patch, as I understand it, is performance. 

Can I ask what the performance overhead of this is for standard OLTP

Do you have some performance numbers for VACUUM with/without this patch?
Presumably it does speed things up considerably, but question is, how

Is there a point where you VACUUM more than x% of a table that it is
actually better to just VACUUM the whole thing, because of readahead?

Is there a size of table for which keeps dsm information is not
worthwhile? i.e. small tables

  Simon Riggs             
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

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


Reply via email to