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
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 |