Re: Monitoring buffercache...

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, Scott Marlowe wrote:

My guess is that the period of time for which pg_buffercache takes locks on the buffer map are short enough that it isn't a real big deal on a fast enough server.

As the server involved gets faster, the amount of time the locks are typically held for drops.

As your shared_buffers allocation increases, that amount of time goes up.

So how painful the overhead is depends on how fast your CPU is relative to how much memory is in it. Since faster systems tend to have more RAM in them, too, it's hard to say whether the impact will be noticable.

Also, noting that the average case isn't impacted much isn't the concern here. The problem is how much having all partition locks held will increase impact worst-case latency.

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux