Re: shared_buffers/effective_cache_size on 96GB server

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

 



On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Shaun Thomas <sthomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Why does nobody every mention that concurrent access has to be taken
>> into account?
>
>
> That's actually a good point. But if you have one giant database, the
> overlap of which tables are being accessed by various sessions is going to
> be immense.

That's why I said "several huge indices". If regularly accessed
indices are separate, and big, it means they don't overlap nor do they
fit in any cache.


-- 
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