| From: | Willy-Bas Loos <willybas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-cluster-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | [performance] fast reads on a busy server |
| Date: | 2012-06-26 22:16:55 |
| Message-ID: | CAHnozTgLOqcAZWJu482Nh9K0f2BobXh3LPGYvycvr+Tb8prozw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-cluster-hackers pgsql-performance |
Hi,
I've read this:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Prioritizing_databases_by_separating_into_multiple_clusters
But it doesn't really say anything about memory.
If i can fit an extra cluster into it's shared buffer, it should have fast
reads, right?
Even if i don't have seperate spindles and the disks are busy.
This is on a Debain server, postgres 8.4
Cheers,
WBL
--
"Quality comes from focus and clarity of purpose" -- Mark Shuttleworth
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2012-06-27 07:34:16 | Re: [performance] fast reads on a busy server |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2012-05-11 18:21:35 | Agenda For 3rd Cluster Hackers Summit, May 15th in Ottawa |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2012-06-27 07:34:16 | Re: [performance] fast reads on a busy server |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-06-26 13:42:34 | Re: Can I do better than this heapscan and sort? |