Re: Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From scott.marlowe
Subject Re: Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.33.0306020921070.11997-100000@css120.ihs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan  (Robert Creager <Robert_Creager@LogicalChaos.org>)
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Robert Creager wrote:

> On Fri, 30 May 2003 14:46:12 -0600 (MDT)
> "scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> said something like:
>
> >
> > level cache is.  On my machine it's about 800 meg. It's measured in 8k
> > blocks, so 100,000 * 8k ~ 800 meg.  The smaller this is, the more
>
> My 'Cached' usage is 1.7Gb.  I've hit the kernel mailing list, and the
> one response I got said don't worry about it :-(

Oh, yeah, just a bit on that.  as far as the kernel developers are
concerned, the buffer / cache is working perfectly, and they're right, it
is.  What they probably don't understand if your need to tell postgresql
how much cache/buffer is allocated to it.

so don't worry about the kernel, the linux kernel really is pretty good at
caching disk access.


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "scott.marlowe"
Date:
Subject: Re: Enabling and Disabling Sequencial Scan
Next
From: "scott.marlowe"
Date:
Subject: Re: Degrading performance