1. 09 Jun, 2006 3 commits
  2. 08 Jun, 2006 16 commits
  3. 07 Jun, 2006 10 commits
  4. 06 Jun, 2006 9 commits
  5. 05 Jun, 2006 2 commits
    • Tom Lane's avatar
      Remove extremely old, incomplete, broken example code. · ff0ac57d
      Tom Lane authored
      Per my proposal a few days ago.
      ff0ac57d
    • Tom Lane's avatar
      While making the seq_page_cost changes, I was struck by the fact that · 7868590c
      Tom Lane authored
      cost_nonsequential_access() is really totally inappropriate for its only
      remaining use, namely estimating I/O costs in cost_sort().  The routine
      was designed on the assumption that disk caching might eliminate the need
      for some re-reads on a random basis, but there's nothing very random in
      that sense about sort's access pattern --- it'll always be picking up the
      oldest outputs.  If we had a good fix on the effective cache size we
      might consider charging zero for I/O unless the sort temp file size
      exceeds it, but that's probably putting much too much faith in the
      parameter.  Instead just drop the logic in favor of a fixed compromise
      between seq_page_cost and random_page_cost per page of sort I/O.
      7868590c