From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Yury Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: So, can we stop supporting Windows native now? |
Date: | 2016-03-31 20:39:26 |
Message-ID: | CAEepm=170rT+B3Hv51Kd3Okdbg=Kxa_HBWqo8LgUtV9jKsBS7Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> It would also be nice to find out why we can't usefully scale shared buffers
> higher like we can on *nix.
Has anyone ever looked into whether asking for SEC_LARGE_PAGES would
help with that? I noticed that another popular RDBMS recommends
enabling this to see a gain when its buffer pool is "several
gigabytes".
I don't do Windows myself, but from poking around in the docs, it
looks like you need to grant SeLockMemoryPrivilege (Start > Control
Panel > Administrative Tools > Local Security Policy > User Rights
Assignment > Lock pages in memory > Action > Properties) because large
pages can't be swapped out (just like on other OSs). So maybe it
could work like huge_pages = try on Linux so that it works out of the
box with 4K pages, but starts using 2MB (?) pages if you grant
SeLockMemoryPrivilege.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366543(v=vs.85).aspx
Just a thought.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-03-31 20:40:53 | Re: improving GROUP BY estimation |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-03-31 20:38:19 | Re: Please correct/improve wiki page about abbreviated keys bug |