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

Re: Working on huge RAM based datasets

From: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
To: "Andy Ballingall" <andy_ballingall(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Working on huge RAM based datasets
Date: 2004-07-09 14:16:36
Message-ID: 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB34101AEC2@Herge.rcsinc.local (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
> What is it about the buffer cache that makes it so unhappy being able
to
> hold everything? I don't want to be seen as a cache hit fascist, but
isn't
> it just better if the data is just *there*, available in the
postmaster's
> address space ready for each backend process to access it, rather than
> expecting the Linux cache mechanism, optimised as it may be, to have
to do
> the caching?

The disk cache on most operating systems is optimized.  Plus, keeping
shared buffers low gives you more room to bump up the sort memory, which
will make your big queries run faster.

Merlin


Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Bill ChandlerDate: 2004-07-09 15:18:48
Subject: Re: Terrible performance after deleting/recreating indexes
Previous:From: Andy BallingallDate: 2004-07-09 09:28:24
Subject: Re: Working on huge RAM based datasets

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