Re: Caching (was Re: choosing the right platform)
Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan@nsd.ca>
From: Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan@nsd.ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: jim@nasby.net, "scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>, Matthew Nuzum <cobalt@bearfruit.org>, "'Josh Berkus'" <josh@agliodbs.com>, "'Pgsql-Performance'" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Date: 2003-04-10T18:59:55Z
Lists: pgsql-performance
How can we solve the problem of cache trashing when scanning large tables? Tom Lane wrote: > > Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan@nsd.ca> writes: > > Shouldn't there be a way to lock some tables in PG cache? > > In my opinion, no. I do not think a manual locking feature could > possibly be used effectively. It could very easily be abused to > decrease net performance, though :-( > > It does seem that a smarter buffer management algorithm would be a good > idea, but past experiments have failed to show any measurable benefit. > Perhaps those experiments were testing the wrong conditions. I'd still > be happy to see LRU(k) or some such method put in, if someone can prove > that it actually does anything useful for us. (As best I recall, I only > tested LRU-2 with pgbench. Perhaps Josh's benchmarking project will > offer a wider variety of interesting scenarios.) > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org