Is the ring buffer not used for index blocks
От | Daniel Westermann |
---|---|
Тема | Is the ring buffer not used for index blocks |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AM4PR0901MB1346EF6127174CA84FE2F674D2660@AM4PR0901MB1346.eurprd09.prod.outlook.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-general |
Hi, we just wondered: When a huge table is loaded into buffer cache it goes into the ring buffer to not pollute the cache. Thesame is apparently not true for indexes as much more blocks are cached. -- Restarted the instance pgbench=# explain (analyze,buffers) select count(*) from pgbench_accounts; QUERY PLAN --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finalize Aggregate (cost=212771.98..212771.99 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=848.179..848.179 rows=1 loops=1) Buffers: shared hit=6 read=9045 -> Gather (cost=212771.77..212771.98 rows=2 width=8) (actual time=847.981..848.172 rows=3 loops=1) Workers Planned: 2 Workers Launched: 2 Buffers: shared hit=6 read=9045 -> Partial Aggregate (cost=211771.77..211771.78 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=835.475..835.475 rows=1 loops=3) Buffers: shared hit=18 read=27325 -> Parallel Index Only Scan using pgbench_accounts_pkey on pgbench_accounts (cost=0.43..201355.10 rows=4166667width=0 Heap Fetches: 0 Buffers: shared hit=18 read=27325 Planning time: 0.166 ms Execution time: 853.673 ms (13 rows) pgbench=# SELECT c.relname, count(*) AS buffers FROM pg_class c INNER JOIN pg_buffercache b ON b.relfilenode=c.relfilenode INNER JOIN pg_database d ON (b.reldatabase=d.oid AND d.datname=current_database()) GROUP BY c.relname ORDER BY 2 DESC LIMIT 50; relname | buffers ----------------------------------+--------- pgbench_accounts_pkey | 16160 pgbench_accounts | 6 pg_index | 4 pgbench=# show shared_buffers ; shared_buffers ---------------- 128MB (1 row) pgbench=# select version(); version ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PostgreSQL 10.3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc (GCC) 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-16), 64-bit (1 row) Can someone please explain this? Why do we see so many blocks of the primary key? Shouldn't this be limited somehow in thesame way it is currently done for tables? Thanks in advance Daniel
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: