From: | Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres Cache usage |
Date: | 2012-09-19 17:38:03 |
Message-ID: | 505A02FB.60206@pinpointresearch.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On 09/19/2012 09:36 AM, A J wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a read heavy application. I would want it to read from memory
> as database latency has to be in low milliseconds.
> The database is not too big in size and can be fully contained in memory.
>
> With Postgres, if I cache all the tables (by pre-emptive querying such
> as select * from tables); is it assured that all subsequent queries
> that have involved where clauses made up of several indexed fields
> will still hit the cache (unless data is refreshed by writes) ?
>
> Example if my first query is select * from table1. Then if my second
> query is "select * from table1 where (field1 between v1 and v2) and
> (field2 between v3 and v4)"; would the second query read from the cache ?
>
> Thanks.
Probably, mostly. But the planner won't use an index for the first query
but hopefully will on the second and the index may not be cached. If you
have enough RAM and nothing contending for it then the OS will probably
cache appropriately.
But there are other optimizations you may want to consider like turning
off atime on your disk (for Linux, in any case) to avoid requiring a
write for every read.
For simple read queries the connection setup time will become an issue
so connection-pooling and persistent connections will be useful.
Cheers,
Steve
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Holt | 2012-09-19 18:25:01 | max_locks_per_transaction and partitioned tables |
Previous Message | A J | 2012-09-19 16:36:57 | Postgres Cache usage |