Re: shared_buffers and shmmax what are the max recommended values?

That's crystal. Thanks for your advice!
Cheers
Anton

On 07/03/2008, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2008, Anton Melser wrote:
>
>
> > There is actually quite a bit of write (at least the dump is increasing
> > far more than what is being added manually by content writers... and I'm
> > not even certain where it is coming from but that is another story!)
>
>
> If you look at pg_stat_user_tables regularly that should give you an idea
> what's being added/updated/deleted.
>
>
> > yes checkpoint_segments is at the default... if I increase to 10 or so
> > will that be better?
>
>
> There will be less checkpoints, which may be better for you. But each
> checkpoint could be doing more work, so they will be more disruptive,
> which can be worse. It's not a parameter you can increase and that will
> always be an improvement.
>
> Normally people doing write-heavy work set that into the 30-100 range.
> You will use more disk space for the WAL files used by the server, and
> recovery from a crash will take longer as well. The default of 3 keeps
> WAL files at a total of about 112MB; increasing to 10 raises that to
> 336MB, and at 30 you can expect to have 1GB of WAL files around on the
> primary server.
>
>
> > btw, we have a warm standby via wal copies if that makes a difference...
>
>
> Changing checkpoint_segments doesn't alter how often WAL files are moved
> over, but it will increase how many of them you need to keep around on the
> secondary in order to rebuild the server after a crash. You should be
> careful making changes here until you understand how all that fits
> together.
>
>
> --
> * Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
>

--
echo '16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlbxq' | dc
This will help you for 99.9% of your problems ...