| From: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Amiel <becauseimjeff(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_rewarm status |
| Date: | 2013-12-17 15:08:52 |
| Message-ID: | 1387292932.59827.YahooMailNeo@web162905.mail.bf1.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I have used pg_prewarm during some of work related to Buffer
>> Management and other performance related work. It is quite
>> useful utility.
>> +1 for reviving this patch for 9.4
>
> Any other votes?
Where I would have used a prewarm utility is following an off-hours
VACUUM FREEZE run. Where this maintenance made sense the only
downside I saw was a brief period in the mornings where the cache
was not populated with the "hot" data, and performance was somewhat
degraded until the cache settled in again.
So, +1.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-12-17 15:19:48 | Re: commit fest 2013-11 final report |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-12-17 15:05:58 | Re: patch: make_timestamp function |