| From: | "Rick Gigger" <rick(at)alpinenetworking(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "PgSQL General ML" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: performance problem |
| Date: | 2003-11-18 23:54:59 |
| Message-ID: | 021a01c3ae43$3b25a2f0$0700a8c0@trogdor |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-general |
> Usually doesn't. More sort_mem might though. Make it something like
> 16384 or 32768 (it's measured in kbytes)
I thought that it was measured in 8k blocks.
http://candle.pha.pa.us/main/writings/pgsql/hw_performance/node3.html
> That's VERY high. When postgresql has to manage a lot of buffers it
> actually is slower than letting the kernel in Linux or BSD do it for you.
Even if you've got the memory to spare? Does postgres actually slow down
just because it's slower to manager a lot of them just or because you're
taking the memory away from the kernel so the kernel has to swap more?
rg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-11-19 00:21:37 | Re: Point-in-time data recovery - v.7.4 |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-11-18 23:41:35 | Re: Point-in-time data recovery - v.7.4 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2003-11-19 00:21:37 | Re: Point-in-time data recovery - v.7.4 |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-11-18 23:41:35 | Re: Point-in-time data recovery - v.7.4 |