| From: | "Sam R(dot)" <samruohola(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, "pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: To keep indexes in memory, is large enough effective_cache_size enough? |
| Date: | 2018-09-19 11:06:53 |
| Message-ID: | 1303501281.5352660.1537355213227@mail.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Size of the index of one huge table has been e.g. 16-20 GB (after REINDEX).
Size of such an index is quite big.
BR Samuli
On Wednesday, September 19, 2018 2:01 PM, Sam R. <samruohola(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
Hi!
Thanks for all of the comments!
David wrote:> if you mention
> how muchRAM the server has and how big the data is now
Let's say for example:
RAM: 64 GB
Data: 500 GB - 1.5 TB, for example.
( RAM: Less would of course be better, e.g. 32 GB, but we could maybe go for an even little bit bigger value than 64 GB, if needed to. )
BR Sam
On Wednesday, September 19, 2018 1:11 PM, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Arthur Zakirov | 2018-09-19 11:23:06 | Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema variables |
| Previous Message | Sam R. | 2018-09-19 11:01:16 | Re: To keep indexes in memory, is large enough effective_cache_size enough? |