4 ms·
> Or reverse the time fields during indexing (slower, but still not as slow as an unnecessary disk read!). When you're IO bound, I'm not sure it actually is sl
by dllthomas 5y ago
> Or reverse the time fields during indexing (slower, but still not as slow as an unnecessary disk read!).
When you're IO bound, I'm not sure it actually is slower in practice.
- colanderman 5y agoDepending on caching strategy, using random UUIDs also decreases the maximum working set size before you become I/O bound by a huge factor. Postgres e.g. relies heavily on the O/S block cache and is subject to this.
- dllthomas 5y ago> using random UUIDs I wasn't discussing using random UUIDs.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]