Re: how delete/insert/update affects select performace?

Even if I have a server with 16GB of ram, I must set the shared_buffer to
512MB on windows?

In the wiki page they talk about 1/4 of ram, in my case that represent a
shared_buffer = 4GB, that is incorrect?

I have 8 GB of ram for each processor, each processor is a quad core with
hyperthreading, that means 16 "processors" o something like that. Windows
show 16 in task manager.

If I can't configure more than 512MB of shared_buffer all other RAM is
unnecessary?

Thanks for your time.

-----Mensaje original-----
De: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] En nombre de Greg Smith
Enviado el: jueves, 08 de septiembre de 2011 09:29 p.m.
Para: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Asunto: Re: [PERFORM] how delete/insert/update affects select performace?

On 09/08/2011 12:40 PM, Anibal David Acosta wrote:
> Postgres 9.0 on windows server 2008 r2 HW is a dell dual processor
> with 16gb of ram .
>

The general guidelines for Windows servers such as
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Tuning_Your_PostgreSQL_Server recommend a
fairly small setting for the shared_buffers parameters on Windows--no more
than 512MB. That makes your server a bit less likely to run in the nasty
checkpoint spike issues Kevin was alluding to. I don't think we've seen any
reports of that on Windows. The problem is worst on Linux.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us

--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance