From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Barbara Stephenson <barbara(at)turbocorp(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: tuning our database by increasing shared buffer |
Date: | 2009-06-23 19:25:51 |
Message-ID: | 25396.1245785151@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Barbara Stephenson <barbara(at)turbocorp(dot)com> writes:
> We will be consolidating from 4 databases to 2 and want to make sure that
> these parameters are the only ones that need changing. Please advise.
> Current Future
> ===== =====
> Max_connection = 50 125
> Shared_buffers = 16MB 48MB
You will need to make sure that the FSM size parameters are correct for
the combined databases, too.
> Shouldn't we increase the max_locks_per_transaction from 64 to 100 or 128
> since we have more than doubled the # of connections?
No, because the lock table size automatically scales with
max_connections. (Probably max_locks_per_transaction should have been
called max_locks_per_connection ...)
> max_prepared_transaction is set at default of 5 which is says if we use it to
> set it to max_connection.
Are you using prepared transactions at all? If not, I'd actually
recommend setting that to zero to make sure nobody creates a prepared
transaction accidentally. You do *not* want anyone doing PREPARE
TRANSACTION unless there's an XA manager or something in place to make
sure the prepared xact gets committed or rolled back reasonably soon.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Barbara Stephenson | 2009-06-23 19:43:09 | Re: tuning our database by increasing shared buffer |
Previous Message | Barbara Stephenson | 2009-06-23 19:02:30 | tuning our database by increasing shared buffer |