Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache
Date: 2011-03-21 19:33:50
Message-ID: 1300735965-sup-8640@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Excerpts from Josh Berkus's message of lun mar 21 13:47:21 -0300 2011:

> We already did that, actually, when we implemented ARC: effectively gave
> PostgreSQL a 3-level cache. The results were not very good, although
> the algorithm could be at fault there.

Was it really all that bad? IIRC we replaced ARC with the current clock
sweep due to patent concerns. (Maybe there were performance concerns as
well, I don't remember).

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-03-21 19:37:52 Re: Planner regression in 9.1: min(x) cannot use partial index with NOT NULL
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2011-03-21 19:29:57 Chinese initdb on Windows