| From: | "George Pavlov" <gpavlov(at)mynewplace(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, "Decibel!" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: DB page cache/query performance |
| Date: | 2008-05-20 14:59:37 |
| Message-ID: | 8C5B026B51B6854CBE88121DBF097A8602212D94@ehost010-33.exch010.intermedia.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> From: Greg Smith [mailto:gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com]
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 9:03 PM
>
> So, yes, in 8.3 it's possible that you can have sequential
> scans of large
> tables or the VACUUM data pass through the buffer cache, but
> not remain in
> it afterwards. I didn't think George would ever run into this in the
> specific example he asked about because of (1). This
> behavior only kicks
> in if you're scanning a table large relative to the total
> shared buffer
> cache and that didn't seem like an issue in his case.
Correct -- the tables in this example were tiny, shared buffers are
large, and, in any case, I am still on 8.1...
George
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dan Joo | 2008-05-20 15:24:30 | Re: psql: FATAL: Ident authentication failed for user "postgres" |
| Previous Message | Maarten Deprez | 2008-05-20 14:48:59 | Re: escaping and quoting |