Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache

From: Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache
Date: 2010-06-15 17:37:55
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
swampler(at)noao(dot)edu (Steve Wampler) writes:
> Or does losing WAL files mandate a new initdb?

Losing WAL would mandate initdb, so I'd think this all fits into the
set of stuff worth putting onto ramfs/tmpfs.  Certainly it'll all be
significant to the performance focus.
select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || '';
"MS  apparently now  has a  team dedicated  to tracking  problems with
Linux  and publicizing them.   I guess  eventually they'll  figure out
this back fires... ;)" -- William Burrow <aa126(at)DELETE(dot)fan(dot)nb(dot)ca>

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-06-15 18:44:32
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] No hash join across partitioned tables?
Previous:From: Craig JamesDate: 2010-06-15 17:12:38
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group