Re: What limits Postgres performance when the whole database lives in cache?

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, dandl <david(at)andl(dot)org>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: What limits Postgres performance when the whole database lives in cache?
Date: 2016-09-03 00:34:08
Message-ID: CAH2-Wzn+6MN2uzD+2fRjb3vposaEsDykqswW1qdeLdBiwrhV+g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
>> > I wondered if there are any figures or measurements on Postgres performance
>> > in this ‘enough memory’ environment to support or contest this point of
>> > view?
>
> I don't think that's really answerable without individual use-cases in
> mind. Answering that question for analytics, operational, ... workloads
> is going to look different, and the overheads are elsewhere.
>
> I personally think that each implementations restrictions are more
> likely to be an issue than anything "fundamental".

+1

At one point, Stonebraker was regularly claiming that "crabbing" of
buffer locks in B-Trees was a fundamental overhead paid in systems
more or less based on System R. He did eventually start to acknowledge
that Lehman and Yao figured out a technique that made that untrue in
1981, if only barely [1], but the lesson for me was to take his claims
in this area with a generous pinch of salt.

[1] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~pavlo/static/papers/stonebraker-ic2e2014.pdf
(See his citation 11)
--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message dandl 2016-09-03 00:39:01 Re: What limits Postgres performance when the whole database lives in cache?
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2016-09-02 23:55:31 Re: a column definition list is required for functions returning "record"