On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 11:46, Tom Lane wrote: > I can't personally get excited about something that only helps if your > server is starved for RAM --- who runs servers that aren't fat on RAM > anymore? But give it a shot if you like. Perhaps your analysis is > pessimistic.
I do suspect my analysis is somewhat pessimistic too but to what degree, I have no idea. You make a good case on your memory argument but please allow me to further kick it around. I don't find it far fetched to imagine situations where people may commit large amounts of memory for the database yet marginally starve available memory for file system buffers. Especially so on heavily I/O bound systems or where sporadicly other types of non-database file activity may occur. Now, while I continue to assure myself that it is not far fetched I honestly have no idea how often this type of situation will typically occur. Of course, that opens the door for simply adding more memory and/or slightly reducing the amount of memory available to the database (thus making it available elsewhere). Now, after all that's said and done, having something like aio in use would seemingly allowing it to be somewhat more "self-tuning" from a potential performance perspective. Greg
Description: This is a digitally signed message part