Re: 8.1beta, SunOS and shmget

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Sergey E(dot) Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 8.1beta, SunOS and shmget
Date: 2005-08-29 16:54:30
Message-ID: 20050829165430.GC11943@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:30:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Sergey E. Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> writes:
> > Yes, the decreasing of max_prepared_transaction helped (after some
> > testing, I've found that the max_prepared_transactions=3
> > max_connections=10 shared_buffers=20 was well enough to fit 1mb of
> > shared memory)
>
> 20 buffers ... ugh. Obviously we are on the hairy edge of no longer
> functioning at all in 1MB shared memory. I'm not sure there is a whole
> lot we can do about this, but it's a tad irritating that clog, subtrans,
> and multixact are eating the equivalent of about 16 buffers
> (nonconfigurable) while the main buffer pool is so badly starved.
> It'd be better to reduce their allocations.

8 buffers each, I think, no? That's 32 buffers total. Maybe we could
make them allocate them automatically based on shared_buffers, with a
ceiling of 8?

For example Min(8, ceil(2*log(shared_buffers))) seems to behave nicely.
That'd mean 3*4 = 12 buffers when shared_buffers is below 100; and 8*4 =
32 buffers when shared_buffers is above 10000.

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]alvh.no-ip.org>)
"La Primavera ha venido. Nadie sabe como ha sido" (A. Machado)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2005-08-29 17:05:49 Re: 8.1beta, SunOS and shmget
Previous Message Sergey E. Koposov 2005-08-29 16:20:11 Re: 8.1beta, SunOS and shmget