Re this talk given by Michael Stonebraker: http://slideshot.epfl.ch/play/suri_stonebraker He makes the claim that in a modern ‘big iron’ RDBMS such as Oracle, DB2, MS SQL Server, Postgres, given enough memory that the entire database lives in cache, the server will spend 96% of its memory cycles on unproductive overhead. This includes buffer management, locking, latching (thread/CPU conflicts) and recovery (including log file reads and writes). [Enough memory in this case assumes that for just about any business, 1TB is enough. The intent of his argument is that a server designed correctly for it would run 25x faster.] I wondered if there are any figures or measurements on Postgres performance in this ‘enough memory’ environment to support or contest this point of view? Regards David M Bennett FACS Andl - A New Database Language - andl.org |
