On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: >> @Claudio So you are basically saying that if I have set effective_cache_size >> to 10GB and I have 10 concurrent processes which are using 10 different >> indices which are for example 2GB, > > It is the size of the table, not the index, which is primarily of > concern. However, that mostly factors into how postgres uses > effective_cache_size, not how you set it.
You're right, I just noticed that a few minutes ago (talk about telepathy). -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
