Message-ID: <4C23AA6C.60505@agliodbs.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:56:44 -0700
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US;
	rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090223 Thunderbird/3.0b2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL as a local in-memory cache
References: <cb0fb58c-9134-4314-a1d0-08fc39f911a6@40g2000pry.googlegroups.com>
	<18287446-8677-46d6-a581-c4777f60ebda@40g2000pry.googlegroups.com>
	<4C1A5B81.8050908@agliodbs.com> <m2typ18ow0.fsf@hi-media.com>
	<op.vegnqzoxeorkce@apollo13>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1006181002360.2534@aragorn.flymine.org>
	<op.veho55mieorkce@apollo13> <4C1BDD40.9030806@agliodbs.com>
	<AANLkTin96FJbBv3kjGwjPKU-K1yAP2AHasAqrLokPqMv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTilDl2awfFVG7MCRIriToXCurxK_l9vYDhJBdV-W@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTilDl2awfFVG7MCRIriToXCurxK_l9vYDhJBdV-W@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> And I'm also planning to implement unlogged tables, which have the
> same contents for all sessions but are not WAL-logged (and are
> truncated on startup).

Yep.  And it's quite possible that this will be adequate for most users.

And it's also possible that the extra CPU which Robert isn't getting rid
of (bgwriter, checkpointing, etc.) does not have a measurable impact on
performance.  At this point, my idea (which I call
"RunningWithScissorsDB") is only an idea for experimentation and
performance testing.  It's pretty far off from being a TODO.

-- 
                                  -- Josh Berkus
                                     PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
                                     http://www.pgexperts.com