From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Jon Griffin" <jon(at)jongriffin(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] PostgreSQL Benchmarks) |
Date: | 2003-02-11 18:01:13 |
Message-ID: | 26924.1044986473@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
"Jon Griffin" <jon(at)jongriffin(dot)com> writes:
> So it appears that linux at least is way above your 8 meg point, unless I
> am missing something.
Yeah, AFAIK all recent Linuxen are well above the range of parameters
that I was suggesting (and even if they weren't, Linux is particularly
easy to change the SHMMAX setting on). It's other Unixoid platforms
that are likely to have a problem. Particularly the ones where you
have to rebuild the kernel to change SHMMAX; people may be afraid to
do that.
Does anyone know whether cygwin has a setting comparable to SHMMAX,
and if so what is its default value? How about the upcoming native
Windows port --- any issues there?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2003-02-11 18:03:45 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-11 17:54:37 | Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re: |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2003-02-11 18:03:45 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-11 17:54:37 | Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re: |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2003-02-11 18:03:45 | Re: Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy] |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-11 17:54:37 | Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re: |