| From: | Олег Самойлов <splarv(at)ya(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: shared_buffers on Big RAM systems |
| Date: | 2019-04-11 11:05:27 |
| Message-ID: | 1010F19A-C26C-4457-BF66-4A8F685E5B42@ya.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
I tested. The shared buffers works better, then an OS level filesystem cache. The more shared_buffers (but less then database size), the better. With huge_pages is more better. But you must reserve enough free memory for OS and PostgeSQL itself.
> 13 дек. 2018 г., в 18:17, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> написал(а):
>
> Hi,
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/runtime-config-resource.html
>
> The docs say, "If you have a dedicated database server with 1GB or more of RAM, a reasonable starting value for shared_buffers is 25%".
>
> But that's pretty archaic in 2018. What if the dedicated database server has 128GB RAM?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-04-11 13:48:06 | Re: When do vacuumed pages/tuples become available for reuse? |
| Previous Message | Thomas Boussekey | 2019-04-11 08:59:32 | Customizing the PSQL prompt with environment variables using value-dependant coloring |