Chris Hoover wrote:
Basically, I'm using the sum(heap_blks_read + idx_blks_read) from pg_statio_all_tables, and diffing the numbers over a period of time (1 hour at least). Is this a fair estimate? The reason for doing this is we are looking at new server hardware, and I want to try and get enough ram on the machine to keep the hot data in memory plus provide room for growth.
Those two are measuring reads to the operating system, which isn't really a good measure of the working data set. If you switch to the internal counters that measure what's already cached, that won't be quite right either. Those will be repeatedly measuring the same block, on the truly hot ones, which inflates how big you'll think the working set is relative to its true size. If you visit http://projects.2ndquadrant.com/talks you'll find a talk called "Inside the PostgreSQL Buffer Cache" that goes over how the cache is actually managed within the database. There's also some sample queries that run after you install the pg_buffercache module into a database. Check out "Buffer contents summary, with percentages". That's the only way to really measure what you're trying to see. I will sometimes set shared_buffers to a larger value than would normally be optimal for a bit, just to get a better reading on what the hot data is.
If you also want to get an idea what's in the operating system cache, the pgfincore module from http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgfincore/ will allow that on a Linux system.
-- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us "PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
