Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some
Date: 2004-10-14 04:29:19
Message-ID: 416E009F.3010709@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On 10/14/2004 12:22 AM, Greg Stark wrote:

> Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>
>> Which would require that shared memory is not allowed to be swapped out, and
>> that is allowed in Linux by default IIRC, not to completely distort the entire
>> test.
>
> Well if it's getting swapped out then it's clearly not being used effectively.

Is it really that easy if 3 different cache algorithms (PG cache, kernel
buffers and swapping) are competing for the same chips?

Jan

>
> There are APIs to bar swapping out pages and the tests could be run without
> swap. I suggested it only as an experiment though, there are lots of details
> between here and having it be a good configuration for production use.
>

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Garamond 2004-10-14 05:00:34 Re: Two-phase commit security restrictions
Previous Message Greg Stark 2004-10-14 04:22:40 Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message MikeSmialek2@Hotmail.com 2004-10-14 17:01:38 Performance on Win32 vs Cygwin
Previous Message Greg Stark 2004-10-14 04:22:40 Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some