How about cache hit rate?
> BTW, when you were running your test case, what shared_buffers did you
> use?
I use 16,64,256 and 4096.
---
Yutaka tanida<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at
2% up
performance comparing from LRU.
Do you have any interest about this patch?
--
Yutaka tanida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.nonsensecorner.com/
qq_1.patch
Description: Binary data
buf_init.c.diff
Description: Binary data
freelist.c.diff
Description:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 00:43:56 +0900
Yutaka tanida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > BTW, when you were running your test case, what shared_buffers did you
> > use?
>
> I use 16,64,256 and 4096.
I missed. My shown result(+4% cache hit rate) is shared_buffers=64.
--
How about cache hit rate?
> BTW, when you were running your test case, what shared_buffers did you
> use?
I use 16,64,256 and 4096.
---
Yutaka tanida<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
ment then
> 2q :)
Thanks for your information. I check the paper and implement it by Java for
testing.
> does pgbench test with relatively large sequential scans?
Probably no.
--
Yutaka tanida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.nonsensecorner.com/
---(end of
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:49:17 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Looks good to me --- we will include it in 7.4.
Thanks.But please note it is not completed yet. I must implement more ,
and move configurable parameter to postgresql.conf file.
--
Yutaka ta
2% up
performance comparing from LRU.
Do you have any interest about this patch?
--
Yutaka tanida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.nonsensecorner.com/
qq_1.patch
Description: Binary data
buf_init.c.diff
Description: Binary data
freelist.c.diff
Description:
Hi.
On Thu, 06 Jun 2002 16:23:29 +0930
Steven Vajdic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How to get read of those "defunct" processes?
What version of cygipc and cygwin do you use?
---
Yutaka tanida<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
謎のWebsite http://ww
