William, > Just my 2 cents on this whole issue. I would lean towards having result > caching in pgpool versus the main backend. I want every ounce of memory > on a database server devoted to the database. Caching results would > double the effect of cache flushing ... ie, now both the results and the > pages used to build the results are in memory pushing out other stuff to > disk that may be just as important. > > If it was in pgpool or something similar, I could devote a separate > machine just for caching results leaving the db server untouched.
Oddly, Joe Conway just mentioned the same idea to me. -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
