But, I'm also still interested in the answer to my question: is there any reason you could not put an 8.0 tablespace on a RAM disk? I can imagine doing it by having an initdb run at startup somehow, with the idea that having a mix of tablespaces in a database would make this harder, but I haven't read enough about tablespaces yet. The problem with trying to mix a RAM tablespace with a persistent tablespace would seem to be that you would have to recreate select data files at system startup before you could start the database. That's why an initdb seems cleaner to me, but...I should stop talking and go read about tablespaces and memcached. I'd be interested to hear if anybody has tried this. And I will also check out memcached, too, of course. Thanks for the pointer. - DAP >-----Original Message----- >From: pgsql-performance-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >David Parker >Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 8:34 PM >To: josh@xxxxxxxxxxxx; pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: Re: tablespace + RAM disk? > >Oh! I sort of started paying attention to that in the >middle...and couldn't make head or tail out of it. Will search >back to the beginning.... > >Thanks. > >- DAP > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh@xxxxxxxxxxxx] >>Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 7:35 PM >>To: pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>Cc: David Parker >>Subject: Re: tablespace + RAM disk? >> >>David, >> >>> We have a couple tables (holding information about network >sessions, >>> for >>> instance) which don't need to persist beyond the life of >the server, >>> but while the server is running they are heavily hit, >>insert/update/delete. >> >>See the thread this last week on Memcached for a cheaper solution. >> >>-- >>--Josh >> >>Josh Berkus >>Aglio Database Solutions >>San Francisco >> > >---------------------------(end of >broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster >
