| From: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Amiel <becauseimjeff(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_rewarm status |
| Date: | 2013-12-17 16:02:12 |
| Message-ID: | 52B07584.9030202@nasby.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/17/13, 8:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I have used pg_prewarm during some of work related to Buffer Management and
>> other performance related work. It is quite useful utility.
>> +1 for reviving this patch for 9.4
>
> Any other votes?
We've had to manually code something that runs EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT * from a bunch of tables to warm our caches after a restart, but there's numerous flaws to that approach obviously.
Unfortunately, what we really need to warm isn't the PG buffers, it's the FS cache, which I suspect this won't help. But I still see where just pg_buffers would be useful for a lot of folks, so +1.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect jim(at)nasby(dot)net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-12-17 16:08:34 | Re: 9.3 reference constraint regression |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2013-12-17 15:59:39 | Re: patch: make_timestamp function |