From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Jim C. Nasby <jnasby@pervasive.com>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: shared_buffer optimization
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:37:00 -0400
Message-ID: <919.1155163020@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060809212804.GU40481@pervasive.com>
References: <44D86A00.90106@rentalia.com>
<87u04nv2q6.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com>
<20060809212804.GU40481@pervasive.com>
"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com> writes:
> Every single piece of advice I've seen on shared_buffers comes from the
> 7.x era, when our buffer management was extremely simplistic. IMO all of
> that knowledge was made obsolete when 8.0 came out, and our handling of
> shared_buffers has improved ever further since then. This is definately
> an area that could use a lot more testing.
Actually I think it was probably 8.1 that made the significant
difference there, by getting rid of the single point of contention
for shared-buffer management. I concur that 7.x-era rules of thumb
may well be obsolete --- we need some credible scaling tests ...
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, jnasby@pervasive.com, cbbrowne@acm.org
Subject: Re: shared_buffer optimization
In-Reply-To: <919.1155163020@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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