Message-ID: <4E770D59.3090906@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 12:37:29 +0300
From: Vitalii Tymchyshyn <tivv00@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stefan Keller <sfkeller@gmail.com>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL-related topics of theses and seminary works
	sought (Was: Hash index use presently(?) discouraged...)
References: 
 <CAFcOn28VoOwGNQJA=qLGXCpxa5p3q-Twqsq8KNBOBX33Cf8u2A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAFcOn28VoOwGNQJA=qLGXCpxa5p3q-Twqsq8KNBOBX33Cf8u2A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

17.09.11 23:01, Stefan Keller написав(ла):
> * more... ?
What I miss from my DB2 UDB days are buffer pools. In PostgreSQL terms 
this would be part of shared buffers dedicated to a relation or a set of 
relations. When you have a big DB (not fitting in memory) you also 
usually want some small tables/indexes be in memory, no matter what 
other load DB has.
Complimentary features are:
1) Relations preloading at startup - ensure this relation are in memory.
2) Per buffer pool (or relation) page costs - tell it that this 
indexes/tables ARE in memory

Best regards, Vitalii Tymchyshyn.