Re: postgresql is slow with larger table even it is in RAM

From: "sathiya psql" <sathiya(dot)psql(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Bill Moran" <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgresql is slow with larger table even it is in RAM
Date: 2008-03-25 13:27:12
Message-ID: f966c2ee0803250627gdd5f1eai61b0bbb199320fd3@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>
> Yes. It takes your hardware about 3 seconds to read through 700M of ram.
>

>
> Keep in mind that you're not just reading RAM. You're pushing system
> requests through the VFS layer of your operating system, which is treating
> the RAM like a disk (with cylinder groups and inodes and blocks, etc) so
> you have all that processing overhead as well. What filesystem did you
> format the RAM disk with?
>
tmpfs

>
> Why are you doing this? If you have enough RAM to store the table, why
> not just allocate it to shared buffers?

just allocating will make read from hdd to RAM at first time, to eliminate
that

>
>
are you saying it will take 3 seconds surely if i have 50 lakh record

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jurgen Haan 2008-03-25 13:33:23 Re: PostgreSQL NetApp and NFS
Previous Message Ivan Voras 2008-03-25 13:16:43 Re: what is the maximum number of rows in a table in postgresql 8.1