Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140507184958.GM13397@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf
value, shared_buffers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-05-07 11:45:04 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> *) raising shared buffers does not 'give more memory to postgres for > >> caching' -- it can only reduce it via double paging > > > > That's absolutely not a necessary consequence. If pages are in s_b for a > > while the OS will be perfectly happy to throw them away. > > The biggest problem with double buffering is not that it wastes > memory. Rather, it's that it wastes memory bandwidth. Doesn't match my experience. Even with the current buffer manager there's usually enough locality to keep important pages in s_b for a meaningful time. I *have* seen workloads that should have fit into memory not fit because of double buffering. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: