| From: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | klo uo <klonuo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: question about memory usage |
| Date: | 2014-07-23 03:53:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20140722235358.c7dc7308db23e096dc0bd75a@potentialtech.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 00:16:47 +0200
klo uo <klonuo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Looking in process explorer, I see unusual size for postgres server
> process, i.e. working set reported around 1GB:
> http://i.imgur.com/HmkvFLM.png (same in attachment)
>
> I also use SqlExpress server with several databases (including spatial) but
> that doesn't go above 100MB in Private Bytes and around 1 MB in Working Set.
>
> I wanted to ask, if this is normal, or there is some problem with my server
> setting?
I'm not an expert on the Windows version, so I could be off-base, but the
POSIX versions of Postgres allocate shared_buffers worth of memory at startup
and lock it for exclusive use by Postgres. Do you have shared_buffers set to
around 1G, perhaps?
--
Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kalai R | 2014-07-23 04:01:15 | PSQL Server couldn't start |
| Previous Message | Torsten Förtsch | 2014-07-23 02:26:36 | Re: check database integrity |