Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] ARC Memory Usage analysis - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] ARC Memory Usage analysis
Date
Msg-id 200410261739.59814.josh@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] ARC Memory Usage analysis  (Thomas F.O'Connell <tfo@sitening.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] ARC Memory Usage analysis  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Thomas,

> As a result, I was intending to inflate the value of
> effective_cache_size to closer to the amount of unused RAM on some of
> the machines I admin (once I've verified that they all have a unified
> buffer cache). Is that correct?

Currently, yes.  Right now, e_c_s is used just to inform the planner and make
index vs. table scan and join order decisions.

The problem which Simon is bringing up is part of a discussion about doing
*more* with the information supplied by e_c_s.    He points out that it's not
really related to the *real* probability of any particular table being
cached.   At least, if I'm reading him right.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Thomas F.O'Connell
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] ARC Memory Usage analysis
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs