After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Riggs), an earthling, wrote: > On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 15:47, Chris Browne wrote: > >> Another thing that would be valuable would be to have some way to say: >> >> "Read this data; don't bother throwing other data out of the cache >> to stuff this in." >> >> Something like a "read_uncached()" call... >> >> That would mean that a seq scan or a vacuum wouldn't force useful >> data out of cache. > > ARC does almost exactly those two things in 8.0. > > Seq scans do get put in cache, but in a way that means they don't > spoil the main bulk of the cache.
We're not talking about the same cache. ARC does these exact things for _shared memory_ cache, and is the obvious inspiration. But it does more or less nothing about the way OS file buffer cache is managed, and the handling of _that_ would be the point of modifying OS filesystem semantics. -- select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'linuxfinances.info'; http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/oses.html Have you ever considered beating yourself with a cluestick? ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
