Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Indices pinned in pageable RAM?

From: Marty Scholes <marty(at)outputservices(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Marty Scholes <marty(at)outputservices(dot)com>
Subject: Indices pinned in pageable RAM?
Date: 2004-06-02 19:38:47
Message-ID: 40BE2CC7.9050105@outputservices.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Has anyone seriously looked at how it would impact things to give the 
DBA the option of storing certain indices in RAM instead of on disk?

Queries (both select and insert/update) against heavily indexed tables 
do most of the reads and writes to the index trees and relatively little 
reading and writing to the actual table data.

The index is completely redundant (read: rebuildable during restart) and 
its rebuild "should" be very parallelizable.  Without the WAL and disk 
synchronization munching, even a single-threaded rebuild during restart 
should be fairly quick.

This would allow the index to stay in RAM. giving it a higher priority 
than all other disk objects in the OS cache.  Putting it in pageable RAM 
would allow the OS to reclaim core if it absolutely had to.

Am I way off here?


Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jonathan GardnerDate: 2004-06-02 20:28:46
Subject: Re: constraint upon view
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2004-06-02 18:54:48
Subject: Re: Default Locale in initdb

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group