Hi Bruce 2013/11/20 Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 09:00:05PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Stefan Keller <sfkel...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > How can Postgres be used and configured as an In-Memory Database? > > > > > > Does anybody know of thoughts or presentations about this "NoSQL > feature" - > > > beyond e.g. "Perspectives on NoSQL" from Gavin Roy at PGCon 2010)? > > > > > > Given, say 128 GB memory or more, and (read-mostly) data that fit's > into > > > this, what are the hints to optimize Postgres (postgresql.conf etc.)? > > In this case as you are trading system safety (system will not be > > crash-safe) for performance... The following parameters would be > > suited: > > - Improve performance by reducing the amount of data flushed: > > fsync = off > > synchronous_commit=off > > - Reduce the size of WALs: > > full_page_writes = off > > - Disable the background writer: > > bgwriter_lru_maxpages = 0 > > Regards, > > FYI, the Postgres manual covers non-durability settings: > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/non-durability.html Thanks for the hint. On 17. November 2013 22:26 I referred to the same document page. Aside config params it is suggested to use memory-backed file system (i.e. RAM disk). But what I am interested in, is how Postgres can be functionally enhanced given the dataset fits into (some big) memory! Being aware and assured that the dataset is in-memory, does'nt this lead to significant speed up, like Stonebraker, Ora and SAP affirm? -S.
