Re: Clock sweep not caching enough B-Tree leaf pages?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Clock sweep not caching enough B-Tree leaf pages?
Date: 2014-04-15 02:11:01
Message-ID: 20140415021101.GC9072@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > I am glad you are looking at this. You are right that it requires a
> > huge amount of testing, but clearly our code needs improvement in this
> > area.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Does anyone recall the original justification for the recommendation
> that shared_buffers never exceed 8GiB? I'd like to revisit the test
> case, if such a thing exists.

I have understood it be that the overhead of managing over 1 million
buffers is too large if you aren't accessing more than 8GB of data in a
five-minute period. If are accessing that much, it might be possible to
have a win over 8GB.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-04-15 02:15:25 Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner?
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2014-04-15 02:06:12 Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner?