Albretch wrote:
Gaetano Mendola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...I asked this question not long after 7.4 debuted. In general the basic answer I got was:
If you access a table more frequently then other and you have enough RAM your OS will mantain that table on RAM, don't you think ? BTW if you trust on your UPS I'm sure you are able to create a RAM disk and place that table in RAM.
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
RAMdisks still need a hard disk drive to operate. I am talking here
about entirely diskless configurations.
1) Especially with 7.5 and the ARC, small tables which can be stored entirely in RAM and are frequently used will end up being fully cached there anyway. Presumably, complex updates would still cause I/O bottlenecks, but read performance should not be any different than for a RAM-based table.
2) Given the upcoming release of ARC, there is no real reason to consider having a table reside only in memory (doing so may impact the performance of other tables in the database as well).
3) HEAP tables are not planned. PostgreSQL is focused on data integrity and reliability, and this is a can of worms regarding these topics which is best left untouched.
Best Wishes, Chris Travers Metatron Technology Consulting
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
