Re: Priority table or Cache table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Priority table or Cache table
Date
Msg-id 19195.1392856700@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Priority table or Cache table  (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Priority table or Cache table  (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>)
Re: Priority table or Cache table  (Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres@cybertec.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> writes:
> I want to propose a new feature called "priority table" or "cache table".
> This is same as regular table except the pages of these tables are having
> high priority than normal tables. These tables are very useful, where a
> faster query processing on some particular tables is expected.

Why exactly does the existing LRU behavior of shared buffers not do
what you need?

I am really dubious that letting DBAs manage buffers is going to be
an improvement over automatic management.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: should we add a XLogRecPtr/LSN SQL type?