Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Josh Berkus
Тема Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache
Дата
Msg-id 4D83F0F1.2020304@agliodbs.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache  (Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>)
Ответы Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 3/18/11 11:15 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> To take the opposite approach... has anyone looked at having the OS just manage all caching for us? Something like
MMAPedshared buffers? Even if we find the issue with large shared buffers, we still can't dedicate serious amounts of
memoryto them because of work_mem issues. Granted, that's something else on the TODO list, but it really seems like
we'rere-inventing the wheels that the OS has already created here...
 

As far as I know, no OS has a more sophisticated approach to eviction
than LRU.  And clock-sweep is a significant improvement on performance
over LRU for frequently accessed database objects ... plus our
optimizations around not overwriting the whole cache for things like VACUUM.

2-level caches work well for a variety of applications.

Now, what would be *really* useful is some way to avoid all the data
copying we do between shared_buffers and the FS cache.

--                                  -- Josh Berkus                                    PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
                        http://www.pgexperts.com
 


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Radosław Smogura
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic Recovery Control functions for use in Hot Standby. Pause,