| From: | Björn Metzdorf <bm(at)turtle-entertainment(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
| Date: | 2002-11-13 13:30:01 |
| Message-ID: | 021e01c28b18$c516b1b0$81c206d4@office.turtleentertainment.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
> > What would the benefit of this be? sort_mem is just an upper limit on
> > memory consumption, and that memory is only allocated on demand. So
> > there shouldn't be a difference between setting sort_mem globally to
> > some reasonable value, and manually changing it for backends that need
> > to do any sorting.
>
> Well, while that is correct, setting sort mem high only when required
would
> prevent memory exhaustion if that happens.
>
> Remember he has 5000 requests per minute with concurrent connection. Now
say
> there is a default high setting of sort mem and a connection persist for a
long
> time, it *might* accumulate memory. Personally I would not keep it high by
> default.
Could you elaborate on what exactly is a query requiring sorting (and
therefore is affected by sort_mem setting)?
Is it a SELECT with WHERE-clause using seq scan? Is it rebuilding of an
index? What else could it be?
Regards,
Bjoern
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jules Alberts | 2002-11-13 13:30:48 | Re: Can not connect to the database |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2002-11-13 13:25:06 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2002-11-13 13:34:27 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2002-11-13 13:25:06 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |