| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Rick Gigger" <rick(at)alpinenetworking(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Doug McNaught" <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>, "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, "PgSQL General ML" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: performance problem |
| Date: | 2003-11-20 21:19:10 |
| Message-ID: | 6890.1069363150@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-general |
"Rick Gigger" <rick(at)alpinenetworking(dot)com> writes:
> I am confused. In this tutorial (by Bruce Momjian)
> http://candle.pha.pa.us/main/writings/pgsql/hw_performance/node8.html
> it says: "As a start for tuning, use 25% of RAM for cache size, and 2-4% for
> sort size."
That advice is widely considered obsolete --- it was developed in the
days when typical RAM sizes were a lot less than today. I don't believe
anyone has shown a good case for setting shared_buffers much higher than
10000.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-20 21:19:56 | Re: Point-in-time data recovery - v.7.4 |
| Previous Message | Mike Mascari | 2003-11-20 21:13:19 | Re: performance problem |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-11-20 21:19:56 | Re: Point-in-time data recovery - v.7.4 |
| Previous Message | Mike Mascari | 2003-11-20 21:13:19 | Re: performance problem |