> 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 Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to