| From: | Mike Ivanov <mikei(at)activestate(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sean Ma <seanxma(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: random slow query |
| Date: | 2009-06-30 19:10:06 |
| Message-ID: | 4A4A630E.4080601@activestate.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Close, but it'll use that memory for cache. Large buffers are not
> typical in linux, large kernel caches are.
>
OK, we're talking about different things. You're right.
> If that tutorial says that, then that tutorial is wrong. I'm guessing
> what that tutorial is talking about, and what top is saying are two
> very different things though.
>
Then it is an amazingly common misconception. I guess it first appeared
in some book and then reproduced by zillion blogs. Essentially this is
what Goolgle brings you on 'swap cache' query.
Thanks for clearing that out.
>>> It's normal, and shouldn't worry anybody. In fact it's a good sign
>>> that you're not using way too much memory for any one process
>> It says exactly the opposite.
>>
This time I agree :-)
Cheers,
Mike
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Carey | 2009-06-30 20:08:12 | Re: random slow query |
| Previous Message | Jean-David Beyer | 2009-06-30 19:06:05 | Re: random slow query |