From: Jeffrey Tenny <jeffrey.tenny@comcast.net>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Mostly read performance
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:21:01 -0400
Message-ID: <42FBCF4D.6060002@comcast.net> (raw)
I have a largely table-append-only application where most transactions
are read-intensive and many are read-only. The transactions may span
many tables, and in some cases might need to pull 70 MB of data out of a
couple of the larger tables.
In 7.3, I don't seem to see any file system or other caching that helps
with repeated reads of the 70MB of data. Secondary fetches are pretty
much as slow as the first fetch. (The 70MB in this example might take
place via 2000 calls to a parameterized statement via JDBC).
Were there changes after 7.3 w.r.t. caching of data? I read this list
and see people saying that 8.0 will use the native file system cache to
good effect. Is this true? Is it supposed to work with 7.3? Is there
something I need to do to get postgresql to take advatage of large ram
systems?
Thanks for any advice.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: jeffrey.tenny@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Mostly read performance
In-Reply-To: <42FBCF4D.6060002@comcast.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox