> > It looks like it wouldn't take too much work to replace 
> > shared buffers on the basis of LRU-2 instead of LRU, so
> > I'm thinking about trying it.
> > 
> > Has anyone looked into this area?  Is there a better method to try?
> 
> Sounds like a perfect idea.  Good luck.  :-)

Hmm, how much time will be required?
I integrate WAL right now and have to do significant changes
in bufmgr...

Vadim



Mon, 16 Oct 2000 17:14:51 -0700
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
RE: Possible performance improvement: buffer replacemen
	t policy
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes:
>> Sounds like a perfect idea.  Good luck.  :-)

> Hmm, how much time will be required?
> I integrate WAL right now and have to do significant changes
> in bufmgr...

Don't worry about it, I am not planning to commit that code anytime
soon.  (I have other stuff I want to fix in bufmgr, but I can wait
for you to finish WAL first.)

			regards, tom lane

Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:39:56 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Possible performance improvement: buffer replacemen t policy 