From: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Questions regarding contrib/tsearch |
Date: | 2002-08-02 15:47:03 |
Message-ID: | 20020802114703.E8966@mail.libertyrms.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 09:39:54AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> If the database is being accessed heavily then it will tend to remain
> swapped in; you don't have to (and really can't) do anything to tweak
> the kernel-level and Postgres-level algorithms that determine this.
> What you want is to ensure there's enough RAM to hold not only all the
> database hotspots, but also all the other programs and working data
> that the server machine will be running.
I was wondering: is there an in-principle reason that there isn't any
mechanism for locking a table in memory, or is it just that no-one
has ever done it?
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 87 Mowat Avenue
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M6K 3E3
+1 416 646 3304 x110
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2002-08-02 15:54:56 | Re: How i can empty the buffers of a db |
Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2002-08-02 15:39:32 | Re: [HACKERS] []performance issues |