Re: [WIP] cache estimates, cache access cost - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: [WIP] cache estimates, cache access cost
Date
Msg-id 4DFE94A0.3030009@2ndQuadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [WIP] cache estimates, cache access cost  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: [WIP] cache estimates, cache access cost
List pgsql-hackers
On 06/19/2011 06:15 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I think the point is that if, on a fresh system, the first access to
> a table is something which uses a tables scan -- like select count(*)
> -- that all indexed access would then  tend to be suppressed for that
> table.  After all, for each individual query, selfishly looking at
> its own needs in isolation, it likely *would* be faster to use the
> cached heap data.
>    

If those accesses can compete with other activity, such that the data 
really does stay in the cache rather than being evicted, then what's 
wrong with that?  We regularly have people stop by asking for how to pin 
particular relations to the cache, to support exactly this sort of scenario.

What I was would expect on any mixed workload is that the table would 
slowly get holes shot in it, as individual sections were evicted for 
more popular index data.  And eventually there'd be little enough left 
for it to win over an index scan.  But if people keep using the copy of 
the table in memory instead, enough so that it never really falls out of 
cache, well that's not necessarily even a problem--it could be 
considered a solution for some.

The possibility that people can fit their entire table into RAM and it 
never leaves there is turning downright probable in some use cases now.  
A good example are cloud instances using EC2, where people often 
architect their systems such that the data set put onto any one node 
fits into RAM.  As soon as that's not true you suffer too much from disk 
issues, so breaking the databases into RAM sized pieces turns out to be 
very good practice.  It's possible to tune fairly well for this case 
right now--just make the page costs all low.  The harder case that I see 
a lot is where all the hot data fits into cache, but there's a table or 
two of history/archives that don't.  And that would be easier to do the 
right thing with given this bit of "what's in the cache?" percentages.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support  www.2ndQuadrant.us




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Florian Pflug
Date:
Subject: Re: the big picture for index-only scans
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: the big picture for index-only scans