Re: Confusion on shared buffer

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Confusion on shared buffer
Date: 2009-10-04 01:02:12
Message-ID: 603c8f070910031802x4de8770l29d271185474360@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 2:11 AM, S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks Robert,
>          So for our scenario what is the most important factor to be noted
> for performance.

Tough to say without benchmarking, but if you have a lot of small
databases that easily fit in RAM, and a lot of concurrent connections,
I would think you'd want to spend your hardware $ on maximizing the
number of cores.

But there are many in this forum who have much more experience with
these things than me, so take that with a grain of salt...

(You might also want to look at consolidating some of those databases
- maybe use one database with multiple schemas - that would probably
help performance significantly.)

...Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message imad 2009-10-04 02:27:46 Re: Performance problems with DISTINCT ON
Previous Message S Arvind 2009-10-03 06:11:41 Re: Confusion on shared buffer