From: | Melvin Davidson <melvin6925(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Rakesh Kumar <dcruncher4(at)aim(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Multiple databases and shared_buffers |
Date: | 2016-02-18 15:15:07 |
Message-ID: | CANu8Fix_8ssoTAR+xjm9_3LEqy4K_VeMxf2utTccdiT5eEuhnw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:23 AM, Rakesh Kumar <dcruncher4(at)aim(dot)com> wrote:
> It is a business requirement that we store our clients data in separate
> databases. Our sales folks insist it is non negotiable. Our current
> technology does
> support that and also maintain buffer pools for each db independently.
> That's why I brought this up. Personally I don't think this is a serious
> limitation at all.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Melvin Davidson <melvin6925(at)gmail(dot)com>
> To: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> Sent: Wed, Feb 17, 2016 9:53 pm
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Multiple databases and shared_buffers
>
> I think this begs the question "Why do you think you need to separate the
> shared_buffers"?
> What version of PostgreSQL are you using?
> What is your O/S?
> How many CPU's on your server?
> How much memory?
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 5:21 PM, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2/17/2016 6:54 AM, Data Cruncher wrote:
>>
>> We will be creating multiple databases in a cluster (instance). Is there
>> any way to separate shared_buffers for each database? Looks like not since
>> PG does not allow user created shared buffers.
>>
>>
>>
>> you would need to run multiple instances if you feel you need that level
>> of control over shared_buffers.
>>
>>
>> --
>> john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
>>
>>
>
>It is a business requirement that we store our clients data in separate
databases. Our sales folks insist it is non negotiable. Our current
technology does
>support that and also maintain buffer pools for each db independently.
NOTE: It is very important you provide the version of PostgreSQL and O/S
when addressing this mail list. That is so others searching the archives in
the future
can determine it's pertenance.
That being said, It looks to me like you have a misunderstanding about how
PostgreSQL uses shared_buffers. Data is not actually stored in the
shared_buffers.
Please refer to the following url which explains it's usage.
http://leopard.in.ua/2013/09/05/postgresql-sessting-shared-memory
--
*Melvin Davidson*
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sridhar N Bamandlapally | 2016-02-18 16:57:24 | Re: JDBC behaviour |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-02-18 15:05:31 | Re: Query plan not updated after dropped index |