Re: PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc., was Re: PostgreSQL is much - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc., was Re: PostgreSQL is much
Date
Msg-id 20031129200450.GD16671@dcc.uchile.cl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc., was Re: PostgreSQL is much  (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>)
List pgsql-general
On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 12:24:22PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:

> [MySQL's heap tables]

> the difference is  that with mysql, nothing pushes the table out of memory; it
> always stays in memory.  in postgresql, a big query on another tables, or
> perhaps a vacuum, or other highly active applications on the same server can
> cause the small tables to be pushed out of memory.   both approches have
> positives and negatives, and in many cases you would probably notice no
> differance

If this is a small heavily used table, 7.5 with the new ARC buffer
management policy should do much better.  Even better, the table does
not actually need to be small: the heavily used portion will stay in
memory where it can be very fast, and the rest will be just wait its
turn on disk.

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Coge la flor que hoy nace alegre, ufana. ¿Quién sabe si nacera otra mañana?"

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Jason Tesser"
Date:
Subject: Re: Triggers, Stored Procedures, PHP. was: Re: PostgreSQL
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: ip of the user doing an insert