Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture

From: "Ben Zeev, Lior" <lior(dot)ben-zeev(at)hp(dot)com>
To: Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture
Date: 2013-05-27 10:25:17
Message-ID: 59E5FDBE8F3B144F8FCF35819B39DD4C16242E27@G6W2498.americas.hpqcorp.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thanks Atri!

Do you know why PostgreSQL store the indexes in memory per process and not in the shared memory?
Is there a way to prevent it store the indexes data per process, and force it storing it in the shared memory?

Lior

-----Original Message-----
From: Atri Sharma [mailto:atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com]
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 13:19
To: Ben Zeev, Lior; Pg Hackers
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Process memory architecture

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Ben Zeev, Lior <lior(dot)ben-zeev(at)hp(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi Atri,
>
> Thanks for your answer!
> Do you have idea what may be the reason that PostgreSQL process consume more memory when there are more partial indexes on the DB table?

Well, I am not too sure, but indexes always take up more space, so if your backend has a lot of indexes, it will cause the process to consume more memory.

Indexes should be used with care, as too many indexes can cause a memory overhead,which can cause performance degradations.

Regards,

Atri

--
Regards,

Atri
l'apprenant

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2013-05-27 10:31:38 Re: COPY .... (FORMAT binary) syntax doesn't work
Previous Message Atri Sharma 2013-05-27 10:19:24 Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture