| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Phillip Berry <pberry(at)stellaconcepts(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-general\(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Maximum reasonable free space map |
| Date: | 2008-12-17 04:02:37 |
| Message-ID: | 87prjrmote.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Phillip Berry <pberry(at)stellaconcepts(dot)com> writes:
> So I guess my question is, is there a point where you start to see
> diminishing returns or even negative returns by setting the fsm too high?
There is no benefit to having FSM larger than necessary, so I suppose that
qualifies as "diminishing returns". The only negative effect is the reduced
memory available for caches and shared buffers.
You might also want to check that you don't have just a few tables which have
a lot of dead space in them. If so filling the FSM is the least of your
worries. The tables with lots of dead space will perform poorly because of the
time spent sifting through all that dead space.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2008-12-17 05:45:18 | Re: Maximum reasonable free space map |
| Previous Message | Ivanmara | 2008-12-17 03:55:43 | Rows count in the cursor ? |