From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Possible performance improvement: buffer replacement policy |
Date: | 2000-10-16 15:41:41 |
Message-ID: | 200010161541.LAA06653@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> (If you subscribe to the ACM digital library, you can get a PDF of this
> from there.) This article argues that standard LRU buffer management is
> inherently not great for database caches, and that it's much better to
> replace pages on the basis of time since the K'th most recent reference,
> not just time since the most recent one. K=2 is enough to get most of
> the benefit. The big win is that you are measuring an actual page
> interreference time (between the last two references) and not just
> dealing with a lower-bound guess on the interreference time. Frequently
> used pages are thus much more likely to stay in cache.
>
> It looks like it wouldn't take too much work to replace shared buffers
> on the basis of LRU-2 instead of LRU, so I'm thinking about trying it.
>
> Has anyone looked into this area? Is there a better method to try?
Sounds like a perfect idea. Good luck. :-)
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-10-16 15:43:38 | Re: snapshots ... |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-10-16 15:35:59 | Re: Precedence of '|' operator (was Re: [patch, rfc] binary operators on integers) |