Re: Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Josh Berkus
Тема Re: Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan
Дата
Msg-id 200604021530.55251.josh@agliodbs.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan  (Brendan Duddridge <brendan@clickspace.com>)
Ответы Re: Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan  (Brendan Duddridge <brendan@clickspace.com>)
Re: Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan  (Jim Nasby <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
Brendan,

> But just as a follow up question to your #1 suggestion, I have 8 GB
> of ram in my production server. You're saying to set the
> effective_cache_size then to 5 GB roughly? Somewhere around 655360?
> Currently it is set to 65535. Is that something that's OS dependent?
> I'm not sure how much memory my server sets aside for disk caching.

Yes, about.  It's really a judgement call; you're looking for the approximate
combined RAM available for disk caching and shared mem.  However, this is
just used as a way of estimating the probability that the data you want is
cached in memory, so you're just trying to be order-of-magnitude accurate,
not to-the-MB accurate.

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Niklas Johansson
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Trigger vs Rule
Следующее
От: Brendan Duddridge
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan