Jim Nasby-2 wrote >> I feel that if there is no memory pressure, frankly it doesnt matter much >> about what gets out and what not. The case I am specifically targeting is >> when the clocksweep gets to move about a lot i.e. high memory pressure >> workloads. Of course, I may be totally wrong here. > > Well, there's either memory pressure or there isn't. If there isn't then > it's all moot *because we're not evicting anything*.
The trade-off I'm seeing here is between measuring when there is no memory pressure - and thus eating at performance while not actually evicting buffers - and not measuring but then encountering memory pressure and not having a clue as to what should be evicted. David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Clock-sweep-not-caching-enough-B-Tree-leaf-pages-tp5799947p5800988.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
