Luke Lonergan wrote: > > I think the topic is similar to "cache bypass", used in cache capable vector > processors (Cray, Convex, Multiflow, etc) in the 90's. When you are > scanning through something larger than the cache, it should be marked > "non-cacheable" and bypass caching altogether. This avoids a copy, and > keeps the cache available for things that can benefit from it.
And 'course some file systems do this automatically when they detect a sequential scan[1] though it can have unexpected (to some) negative side effects[2]. For file systems that support freebehind as a configurable parameter, it might be easier to experiment with the idea there. [1] http://www.ediaudit.com/doc_sol10/Solaris_10_Doc/common/SUNWaadm/reloc/sun_docs/C/solaris_10/SUNWaadm/SOLTUNEPARAMREF/p18.html [2] http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6207772 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
