Re: performance tuning: shared_buffers, sort_mem; swap

Thomas O'Connell wrote:
> so a while back, i think i recall a post from Bruce Momjian describing
> an optimum setup for shared_buffers at 25% of available physical memory
> and sort_mem at 4% of available physical memory.

Yes, that was the numebers to start with.

> the caveat was to watch for swap activity when these values were being
> set. so my question is, how much swapping is too much, and is there a
> way to determine whether postgres is the process causing the swapping?

Well, it doesn't really matter who is causing the swapping. If you have
more of a load on your machine that RAM can hold, you are better off
reducing your PostgreSQL shared buffers.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073