From: | GH <grasshacker(at)over-yonder(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Boris <koester(at)x-itec(dot)de> |
Cc: | GH <grasshacker(at)over-yonder(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Memory requirements for web-project |
Date: | 2001-02-04 17:37:34 |
Message-ID: | 20010204113734.A36531@over-yonder.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sun, Feb 04, 2001 at 06:15:46PM +0100, some SMTP stream spewed forth:
> Hello GH,
>
> Sunday, February 04, 2001, 5:46:54 PM, you wrote:
>
> G> On Sun, Feb 04, 2001 at 05:10:21PM +0100, some SMTP stream spewed forth:
>
>
> G> Is it safe to preume that most of those 160,000 hits will come during
> G> some relatively short peak period? You could end up with 5-10 hits per
> G> second depending on the usage trends.
>
> Yes I understand.
>
> G> "type" of hit). Don't forget about caches and shared memory also.
>
> What do you mean with the cache and the shared memory?
PostgreSQL caches some of the data from the database. If you, for
example, wanted to have most of your database remain in memory, for speed,
then you would want to have more memory than the minimum needed to
handle the queries.
I meant that you would want to be sure that PostgreSQL is configured
with regard to the expected load and the number and mem requirements of
queries. You might see out of memory errors under load.
gh
>
>
> --
> Boris
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mitch Vincent | 2001-02-04 17:57:33 | Re: Memory requirements for web-project |
Previous Message | Boris | 2001-02-04 17:15:46 | Re[2]: Memory requirements for web-project |