From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stefan Keller <sfkeller(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PG as in-memory db? How to warm up and re-populate buffers? How to read in all tuples into memory? |
Date: | 2012-02-28 15:22:27 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1wJ7ciYC_qX1es8oGQSc08jM7Vpvg52ahxU39ao93EC0w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Stefan Keller <sfkeller(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2012/2/26 Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> wrote:
>>>> How about after you load the data, vacuum freeze it, then do something
>>>> like:
>>>>
>>>> SELECT count(*) FROM osm_point WHERE tags @> 'tourism=>junk'
>>>>
>>>> -Andy
>>>
>>>
>>> That good idea is what I proposed elsewhere on one of the PG lists and
>>> got told that this does'nt help.
>>>
> ...
>> I don't buy that. Did you test it? Who/where did you hear this? And...
>> how long does it take after you replace the entire table until things are
>> good and cached? One or two queries?
>>
>> After a complete reload of the data, do you vacuum freeze it?
>
> Yes.
>
>> After a complete reload of the data, how long until its fast?
>
> Just after the second query. You can try it yourself online here:
> http://bit.ly/A8duyB
The second instance of the exact same query is fast. How long until
all similar but not identical queries are fast?
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2012-02-28 16:05:08 | Re: [PERFORM] Re: [PERFORM] Re: [PERFORM] Re: [PERFORM] Re: 回复: [PERFORM] PG as in-memory db? How to warm up and re-populate buffers? How to read in all tuples into memory? |
Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-02-28 15:14:46 | Re: 回复: [PERFORM] PG as in-memory db? How to warm up and re-populate buffers? How to read in all tuples into memory? |