From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Infinite Cache |
Date: | 2011-07-03 18:18:16 |
Message-ID: | 4E10B268.9090405@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 07/01/2011 06:37 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> BTW, thanks to the compression feature of IC I've heard it can
> actually be beneficial to run it on the same server.
Sure, its implementation works in a way that helps improve performance
on the database server. My point was that I'd be shocked if it were
even possible to double performance if you use it. Whereas putting a
pgmemcache server in front of the database can do much better than that,
on a system that reads the same things many times per update. "Infinite
Cache" is a useful technology and the fact that it work transparently
the application is a nice benefit of EDB's commercial product. But it's
usually the case that if you really want to do the best possible
implementation of an approach, optimizing very specifically for your
application is what's needed.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
Comprehensive and Customized PostgreSQL Training Classes:
http://www.2ndquadrant.us/postgresql-training/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marcus Engene | 2011-07-05 10:15:30 | Re: bitmask index |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2011-07-03 11:21:09 | Re: Infinite Cache |