From: | "Ben Zeev, Lior" <lior(dot)ben-zeev(at)hp(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Process memory architecture |
Date: | 2013-06-04 05:57:46 |
Message-ID: | 59E5FDBE8F3B144F8FCF35819B39DD4C16243E69@G6W2498.americas.hpqcorp.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
No matter how I try to redesign the schema the indexes consume large amount of memory,
About 8KB per index.
Is there a way to invalidated this cache?
Is there a way to limit the amount of memory and use some kind of LRU/LFU algorithm to clean old cache?
-----Original Message-----
From: Atri Sharma [mailto:atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com]
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 17:24
To: Stephen Frost
Cc: Ben Zeev, Lior; Pg Hackers
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Process memory architecture
>We may still be able to do better than what we're doing
> today, but I'm still suspicious that you're going to run into other
> issues with having 500 indexes on a table anyway.
+1. I am suspicious that the large number of indexes is the problem
here,even if the problem is not with book keeping associated with those indexes.
Regards,
Atri
--
Regards,
Atri
l'apprenant
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martin Schäfer | 2013-06-04 06:39:57 | Re: UTF-8 encoding problem w/ libpq |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-06-04 04:52:04 | Re: MVCC catalog access |