X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93842DA272; Thu, 6 Oct 2005 06:49:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 56477-04; Thu, 6 Oct 2005 09:49:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from vms048pub.verizon.net (vms048pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.48]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3011D9D29; Thu, 6 Oct 2005 06:49:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([70.108.61.78]) by vms048.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2 HotFix 0.04 (built Dec 24 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0INX00A9DNAMQXZ5@vms048.mailsrvcs.net>; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 04:49:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F84A6285C6; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 05:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (osgiliath [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 31111-02-4; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 05:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 438836000AA; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 05:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 05:49:34 -0400 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? In-reply-to: To: Luke Lonergan Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-Followup-To: Luke Lonergan , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20051006094934.GB17398@mathom.us> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-disposition: inline X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 53 FF 38 00 E7 DD 0A 9C 84 52 84 C5 EE DF 7C 88 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mathom.us References: <20051005153349.GZ2241@mathom.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.003 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.003] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200510/122 X-Sequence-Number: 14890 On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 04:55:51PM -0700, Luke Lonergan wrote: >You've proven my point completely. This process is bottlenecked in the CPU. >The only way to improve it would be to optimize the system (libc) functions >like "fread" where it is spending most of it's time. Or to optimize its IO handling to be more efficient. (E.g., use larger blocks to reduce the number of syscalls.) Mike Stone