| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andre Felipe Machado <andremachado(at)techforce(dot)com(dot)br> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: firebird X postgresql 8.1.2 windows, performance comparison |
| Date: | 2006-03-14 20:26:54 |
| Message-ID: | 20060314202654.GS45250@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 10:39:57PM -0300, Andre Felipe Machado wrote:
> It seems that effective_cache_size does not tell postgresql to actually
> use windows disk cache.
No, it just tells PostgreSQL how much cache memory it should expect to
have.
> What parameter must be configured?
> Do you have some suggestions?
Well, you could try increasing shared_buffers, but the real question is
why Windows isn't caching the data. Are you sure that the data you're
reading is small enough to fit entirely in memory? Remember that
Firebird has a completely different on-disk storage layout than
PostgreSQL, so just because the table fits in memory there doesn't mean
it will do so on PostgreSQL.
--
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 | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-03-14 20:32:53 | Re: x206-x225 |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-03-14 20:11:25 | Re: Process Time X200 |