From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ron Peacetree <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Is There Any Way .... |
Date: | 2005-10-05 00:01:04 |
Message-ID: | 20051005000104.GO40138@pervasive.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 07:33:47PM -0400, Ron Peacetree wrote:
> pg is _very_ stupid about caching. Almost all of the caching is left
> to the OS, and it's that way by design (as post after post by TL has
> pointed out).
>
> That means pg has almost no ability to take application domain
> specific knowledge into account when deciding what to cache.
> There's plenty of papers on caching out there that show that
> context dependent knowledge leads to more effective caching
> algorithms than context independent ones are capable of.
>
> (Which means said design choice is a Mistake, but unfortunately
> one with too much inertia behind it currentyl to change easily.)
>
> Under these circumstances, it is quite possible that an expert class
> human could optimize memory usage better than the OS + pg.
Do you have any examples where this has actually happened? Especially
with 8.x, which isn't all that 'stupid' about how it handles buffers?
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Douglas J. Trainor | 2005-10-05 00:40:54 | Re: Is There Any Way .... |
Previous Message | Ron Peacetree | 2005-10-04 23:33:47 | Re: Is There Any Way .... |