From: | Jayadevan M <maymala(dot)jayadevan(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Farber <alexander(dot)farber(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Tuning 9.3 for 32 GB RAM |
Date: | 2013-11-14 14:48:15 |
Message-ID: | CAFS1N4jBhTR=k-mphiiraDg-qBGLhxHQgj+k_F1nq1hO5=8VVA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Alexander Farber <
alexander(dot)farber(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> do these changes please look okay for a PostgreSQL 9.3 running on CentOS
> 6.4 server with 32 GB RAM (with Drupal 7 and few custom PHP scripts)
>
> postgresql.conf:
>
> shared_buffers = 4096MB
> work_mem = 32MB
> checkpoint_segments = 32
> log_min_duration_statement = 10000
>
> sysctl.conf:
>
> kernel.shmmax=17179869184
> kernel.shmall=4194304
>
> pgbouncer.ini:
>
> listen_port = 6432
> unix_socket_dir = /tmp
> pool_mode = session
> server_reset_query = DISCARD ALL
> server_check_delay = 10
> max_client_conn = 600
> default_pool_size = 50
>
> I understand, that nobody can tell me the optimal settings - unless I
> provide full source code to everything. And if I provide "the full source
> code", nobody will look at it anyway.
>
> So I am just asking, if the settings look okay or if they will waste
> gigabytes of RAM.
>
> Thank you
> Alex
>
> You may want to look at effective_cache_size also. May be quickly go
through
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Tuning_Your_PostgreSQL_Server and see what
http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgtune/
says.
Jayadevan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Farber | 2013-11-14 15:02:30 | Re: Tuning 9.3 for 32 GB RAM |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-11-14 14:35:26 | Re: [GENERAL] Clang 3.3 Analyzer Results |