From: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Planner constants for RAM resident databases |
Date: | 2005-07-02 02:08:23 |
Message-ID: | 20050702020823.GA32264@gp.word-to-the-wise.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 09:59:38PM -0400, Emil Briggs wrote:
> I'm working with an application where the database is entirely resident in RAM
> (the server is a quad opteron with 16GBytes of memory). It's a web
> application and handles a high volume of queries. The planner seems to be
> generating poor plans for some of our queries which I can fix by raising
> cpu_tuple_cost. I have seen some other comments in the archives saying that
> this is a bad idea but is that necessarily the case when the database is
> entirely resident in RAM?
If I'm understanding correctly that'll mostly increase the estimated
cost of handling a row relative to a sequential page fetch, which
sure sounds like it'll push plans in the right direction, but it
doesn't sound like the right knob to twiddle.
What do you have random_page_cost set to?
Cheers,
Steve
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John A Meinel | 2005-07-02 02:40:49 | Re: Planner constants for RAM resident databases |
Previous Message | Emil Briggs | 2005-07-02 01:59:38 | Planner constants for RAM resident databases |