Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > I'm hoping someone can shed some light on these results.
> > 
> > Not without a lot more detail on how you *got* the results.  
> > What exactly did you do to force the various plan choices?  
> > (I see some ridiculous choices of indexscans, for instance, 
> > suggesting improper use of enable_seqscan in some cases.)  
> > And what's the "cache rows" and "disk rows" stuff, and how do 
> > you know that what you were measuring is actually what you 
> > think it is?  I have zero confidence in Windows-atop-ATA as a 
> > platform for measuring disk-related behaviors, because I 
> > don't think you can control or even know what caching is going on.
> You can control the writeback-cache from Device Manager->(the
> disk)->Policies. And if that is turned off, fsync definitly should write
> through, just as on *nix. (write-cache is on by default, no surprise)
> AFAIK, you can't control what is cached for reading.

Are you saying that fsync() doesn't write to the platters by default on

  Bruce Momjian                        |               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

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

Reply via email to