Horton

Re: Priority table or Cache table

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>
Cc: Beena Emerson <memissemerson@gmail.com>, Sameer Thakur <samthakur74@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2015-08-11T06:43:25Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Haribabu Kommi <
> kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > What is the configuration for test (RAM of m/c, shared_buffers,
> > scale_factor, etc.)?
>
> Here are the details:
>
> CPU - 16 core, RAM - 252 GB
>
> shared_buffers - 1700MB, buffer_cache_ratio - 70
> wal_buffers - 16MB, synchronous_commit - off
> checkpoint_timeout - 15min, max_wal_size - 5GB.
>
> pgbench scale factor - 75 (1GB)
>
> Load test table size - 1GB
>

It seems that test table can fit easily in shared buffers, I am not sure
this patch will be of benefit for such cases, why do you think it can be
beneficial for such cases?



With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com