Re: Database Caching

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Database Caching
Date: 2002-02-28 23:27:26
Message-ID: 16039.1014938846@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> writes:
> III. Relation caching

> The final cache is the relation itself, and simply involves putting the entire
> relation into memory. This cache has a field for the name of the relation,
> the table info itself, the type (indexes should ideally be cached more than
> tables, for example), the access time, and the acccess number. Loading could
> be done automatically, but most likely should be done according to a flag
> on the table itself or as an explicit command by the user.

This would be a complete waste of time; the buffer cache (both Postgres'
own, and the kernel's disk cache) serves the purpose already.

As I've commented before, I have deep misgivings about the idea of a
query-result cache, too.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dann Corbit 2002-02-28 23:44:54 Re: Database Caching
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-02-28 23:07:20 Re: elog() patch