answering my own email with a new question on the same topic:
Increasing the shared_buffer value, does this have the same effect as
storing all data in a ramdisk?
Here is a little discussion on the topic:
http://magazine.redhat.com/2007/12/12/tip-from-an-rhce-memory-storage-on-postgresql/
Here is one quote from the discussion:
"Increasing shared buffers can effectively keep a db in memory. The
default configuration has traditionally been way too conservative - am
sure someone will eventually get round to writing a script to tune
configuration based on a user response to questions and hardware probing.
Course if the data is not critical and you just need something
lightweight there are application specific options…"
Any other online-resources on the topic?
Thanks,
Andreas
Andreas Neumann wrote:
Hi,
I wonder if people have experiences with running Postgis with
tablespaces on a ramdisk?
How are the performance gains - is it worth a try?
My DB is several hundred mb (300-400 - may grow), the physical RAM is
8GB. Most of the DB is read-only. I would perhaps only store the
read-only part in the RAM-disk and the read-write part on harddisk.
Thanks for any hints, resources or experiences regarding Postgis and
RAM-Disk.
Andreas
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
