Re: [HACKERS] Postgres Performance
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Postgres Performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13293.936374961@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Postgres Performance (Edwin Ramirez <ramirez@doc.mssm.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Edwin Ramirez <ramirez@doc.mssm.edu> writes: > I have a couple of large(?) tables which I would like to keep them in > memory (cached) so that searches are performed as fast as possible. > Is it possible to 'pin' the tables and it's indexes in memory? If the tables are being touched often, then they will stay in buffer cache of their own accord. I doubt that pinning them would improve performance --- if they do get swapped out it'd be because some other table(s) need to be accessed now, and if you did have these tables pinned you'd be taking a large hit in access performance for those other tables because of inadequate buffer space. LRU buffering policy really works pretty well, so I don't think you need to worry about it. > currently I run the postmaster with the following setting: > postmaster -i -B 2048 -o '-S 2048' > Are there any other options/values which would yield better performance? If you have a reliable OS and power source, consider -o -F (no fsync). This usually makes for a very substantial performance improvement, and it can only hurt if your machine goes down without having performed all the writes the kernel was told to do. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: