On 6/30/09 1:08 PM, "Scott Carey" <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > A larger shared_buffers size can help if sequential scans are infrequent and > kick out pages from the OS page cache. > Postgres does not let sequential scans kick out index pages or pages > accessed randomly from its buffer cache, but the OS (Linux) is more prone to > that. Let me qualify the above: Postgres 8.3+ doesn't let full page scans push out pages from its shared_buffers. It uses a ring buffer for full page scans and vacuums. > > Whether larger or smaller shared_buffers will help is HIGHLY load and use > case dependant. > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
