Re: effective_io_concurrency

On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
> From my attempted reading of the thread "posix_fadvise v22", it seems
> like modification of the planner was never discussed, rather than
> being discussed and rejected.  So, is there a reason not to make the
> planner take account of effective_io_concurrency?

Not that I can see.

> But it might be better yet to make ordinary index scans benefit from
> effective_io_concurrency, but even if/when that gets done it would
> probably still be worthwhile to make the planner understand the
> benefit.

That sounds good too, but separate.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company