From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Forcing using index instead of sequential scan?
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 07:07:26 -0400
Message-ID: <20060723110724.GU8069@mathom.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44C25FDD.8070003@modgraph-usa.com>
References: <D012B9600FFB984AB18C0D53C475A4A081F51B@E03MVZ3-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
<26827.1153585341@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<44C25FDD.8070003@modgraph-usa.com>
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 10:26:53AM -0700, Craig A. James wrote:
>This causes massive file-system activity and flushes all files that the
>kernel has cached. If you run this between each Postgres test (let it run
>for a couple minutes), it gives you an apples-to-apples comparison between
>successive benchmarks, and eliminates the effects of caching.
Assuming a system with small ram or an unusually large system
installation. Unmounting is a much more realiable mechanism.
Mike Stone
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: mstone+postgres@mathom.us
Subject: Re: Forcing using index instead of sequential scan?
In-Reply-To: <20060723110724.GU8069@mathom.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox