Re: To keep indexes in memory, is large enough effective_cache_size enough?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Rowley
Тема Re: To keep indexes in memory, is large enough effective_cache_size enough?
Дата
Msg-id CAKJS1f9W+nhzj_CV2wP++XH8j-onnv8boBqzqvu1vpe=uH2pQA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: To keep indexes in memory, is large enough effective_cache_sizeenough?  ("Sam R." <samruohola@yahoo.com>)
Ответы Re: To keep indexes in memory, is large enough effective_cache_sizeenough?
Список pgsql-performance
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 18:36, Sam R. <samruohola@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Regarding double buffering: I do not know how much double buffering would slow down operations.
> It could also be possible to turn off kernel page cache on our DB server, to avoid double buffering. Although, we may
stillkeep it in use.
 

I think you've misunderstood double buffering.  The double buffering
itself does not slow anything down. If the buffer is in shared buffers
already then it does not need to look any further for it. Double
buffering only becomes an issue when buffers existing 2 times in
memory causes other useful buffers to appear 0 times.

-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Vladimir Ryabtsev
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Why could different data in a table be processed with different performance?
Следующее
От: Vladimir Ryabtsev
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Why could different data in a table be processed with different performance?