Re: was there a change in FreeBSD SHM implementation from

From: Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>
To: Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: was there a change in FreeBSD SHM implementation from
Date: 2002-07-12 00:37:31
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.44.0207120935020.436-100000@angelic.cynic.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Vivek Khera wrote:

> Actually performance went down. Way down. I disagree with your
> argument that increasing the cache will help, since the cache is not
> needed if you don't pushd out your SHM pages in the first place and
> need to reload them quickly.

Ah, so your entire working data set can fit into your shared memory? In
that case, yes, you are better off not decreasing it. I guess we should
add a note to the FAQ for people using very small databases....

cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2002-07-12 00:48:27 Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly
Previous Message Mike Mascari 2002-07-12 00:36:39 Re: Jan's Name (Was: Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly)