On 11/7/07, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 11/07/07 09:58, Tom Lane wrote: > > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On 11/07/07 09:03, Gauthier, Dave wrote: > >>> Is there such a thing as a temporary, probably in-memory, version of a > >>> Postgres DB? > > > >> If you have enough RAM, and your database is small enough, the OS > >> will eventually cache the whole thing. > > > > Or put it on a ramdisk filesystem. > > But doesn't that just add more overhead and reduce the amount of > memory that the OS can cache things in?
Didn't say it was the smart thing to do. Just that you could do it. I think if one is looking at in memory databases, PostgreSQL is NOT the first choice really. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
