Re: sql performance and cache - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Christopher Kings-Lynne
Subject Re: sql performance and cache
Date
Msg-id 3F87D764.8030306@familyhealth.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to sql performance and cache  ("Chris Faulkner" <chrisf@oramap.com>)
Responses Re: sql performance and cache  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Re: [SQL] sql performance and cache  (Wei Weng <wweng@kencast.com>)
List pgsql-performance
> I have two very similar queries which I need to execute. They both have
> exactly the same from / where conditions. When I execute the first, it takes
> about 16 seconds. The second is executed almost immediately after, it takes
> 13 seconds. In short, I'd like to know why the query result isn't being
> cached and any ideas on how to improve the execution.

<snip>

> OK - so I could execute the query once, and get the maximum size of the
> array and the result set in one. I know what I am doing is less than optimal
> but I had expected the query results to be cached. So the second execution
> would be very quick. So why aren't they ? I have increased my cache size -
> shared_buffers is 2000 and I have doubled the default max_fsm... settings
> (although I am not sure what they do). sort_mem is 8192.

PostgreSQL does not have, and has never had a query cache - so nothing
you do is going to make that second query faster.

Perhaps you are confusing it with the MySQL query cache?

Chris


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Chris Faulkner"
Date:
Subject: sql performance and cache
Next
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Date:
Subject: Re: sql performance and cache