> 4. Even if we could accurately estimate the percentage of the table
> that is cached, what then? For example, suppose that a user issues a
> query which retrieves 1% of a table, and we know that 1% of that table
> is cached. How much of the data that the user asked for is cache?
> Hard to say, right? It could be none of it or all of it. The second
> scenario is easy to imagine - just suppose the query's been executed
> twice. The first scenario isn't hard to imagine either.
I have a set of slow disks which can impact performance nearly as much as in
cached in memory versus the fast disks.
How practical would it be for analyze to keep a record of response times for
given sections of a table as it randomly accesses them and generate some
kind of a map for expected response times for the pieces of data it is
It may well discover, on it's own, that recent data (1 month old or less)
has a random read response time of N, older data (1 year old) in a different
section of the relation tends to have a response time of 1000N, and really
old data (5 year old) tends to have a response time of 3000N.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-02-25 17:17:55|
|Subject: Re: wCTE behaviour |
|Previous:||From: Cédric Villemain||Date: 2011-02-25 16:45:43|
|Subject: Re: WIP: cross column correlation ...|