Re: Configuration settings for 32GB RAM server

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Mark Lonsdale <mark(dot)lonsdale(at)wysdm(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Configuration settings for 32GB RAM server
Date: 2006-12-04 17:42:57
Message-ID: 1165254177.25371.33.camel@dogma.v10.wvs
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 12:10 -0500, Mark Lonsdale wrote:

> - 4 physical CPUs (hyperthreaded to 8)
>
> - 32 GB RAM
>
> - x86_64 architecture
>
> - RedHat AS 4
>
> - postgres 8.1.5
>
>
>
> Ive been taking a look at the various postgres tuning parameters, and
> have come up with the following settings.
>
>
>
> shared_buffers – 50,000 - >From what Id read, increasing this
> number higher than this wont have any advantages ?
>

Where did you read that? You should do some tests. Generally 25% of
physical memory on a dedicated box is a good point of reference (on 8.1,
anyway). I've heard as high as 50% can give you a benefit, but I haven't
seen that myself.

> fsm_pages = 200,000 – Based this on some statistics about the number
> of pages freed from a vacuum on older server. Not sure if its fair
> to calculate this based on vacuum stats of 7.3.4 server?
>

Might as well make it a higher number because you have a lot of RAM
anyway. It's better than running out of space in the FSM, because to
increase that setting you need to restart the daemon. Increasing this by
1 only uses 6 bytes. That means you could set it to 10 times the number
you currently have, and it would still be insignificant.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Stone 2006-12-04 17:43:22 Re: Bad iostat numbers
Previous Message Alex Turner 2006-12-04 17:37:29 Re: Bad iostat numbers