On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Greg Smith <gsm...@gregsmith.com> writes: >> On Tue, 26 May 2009, Scott Marlowe wrote: >>> Also, in the morning, have a cron job crank up that does "select * from >>> mybigtable" for each big table to load it into cache. > >> Just to clarify: on 8.3 and later versions, doing this doesn't do what >> some people expect. Sequential scans like that will continuously re-use a >> 256KB section of the PostgreSQL shared_buffers space, so this won't cause >> all of that to get paged back in if the problem is related to it being >> swapped out. It will pass everything through the OS buffer cache though >> and prime it usefully, which might be all that's actually needed. > > Bearing in mind that this is a Windows server ... I seem to recall that > the conventional wisdom is still to keep shared_buffers relatively small > on Windows. So priming the OS cache is exactly what it's about. > (Keeping that down should also help avoid the other scenario Scott was > worried about, where shared memory itself gets paged out.)
Yeah, I thought it was pretty obvious I was talking OS cache up there. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
