On Sat, 26 Sep 2009, Greg Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> Does it do this even if the block was already in shared_buffers?
> Usually not. The buffer ring algorithm is used to manage pages that are read
> in specifically to satisfy a sequential scan (there's a slightly different
> ring method used for VACUUM too). If the buffer you need is already
> available and not "pinned" (locked by someone else), it's not read from disk
> again. Instead, its usage count is incremently only if it's at zero (this
> doesn't count as a use unless it's about to be evicted as unused), and it's
> returned without being added to the ring.
What happens when a postmaster dies (e.g. core dump, kill -9, etc.). How
is reference counting cleaned up and the lock removed?
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-09-26 17:03:57|
|Subject: Re: Bad performance of SELECT ... where id IN (...) |
|Previous:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2009-09-26 15:19:54|
|Subject: Re: PG 8.3 and large shared buffer settings|