From: | Sachin Srivastava <ssr(dot)teleatlas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: RAM of Postgres Server |
Date: | 2016-01-07 07:32:00 |
Message-ID: | CAFzqEhK-Ff53W5zBtL-ovzo6JZcop9SpkVBgWk97TT=A3UAN4w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Dear David,
Q: RAM holds data that is recently accessed - how much of that will you
have?
Ans: Kindly confirm, as per your question “RAM holds data that is recently
accessed” : How we figured out that how much data we will have. Is it
depends of Total WAL files (total "checkpoint_segment" I have given 32), am
I correct or thinking wrong, please clarify to me.
Right now we have 10 GB RAM for first database server and 3 GB RAM for
another database server.
Q: Cores help service concurrent requests - how many of those will you
have? How fast will they complete?
Ans: It’s means, if we have more core then we can do our work fast. Like
from 9.3 onwards for pg_dump as example, if machines having multiple cores
as the load can be shared among separate threads.
So if possible to us then more core should be available on database server
for better performance, please clarify the benefit of more core to me.
Right now we have 1 core for first database server and 2 core for another
database server.
Regards,
Sachin
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:25 AM, David G. Johnston <
david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Sachin Srivastava <
> ssr(dot)teleatlas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Team,
>>
>> Please suggest, how much RAM and core should be define for New Postgres
>> database server, if we will use Postgres 9.3 and above.
>>
>> If suppose my postgres database size will be near about 300 to 500 GB for
>> future.
>>
>> There is any document regarding this server configuration, suggest ?
>>
>>
>>
> Total size is meaningless because, for instance, consider if of that
> 500GB, 499GB of it
>
> is archive data that is rarely if ever accessed.
>
> RAM holds data that is recently accessed - how much of that will you have?
> Cores help service concurrent requests - how many of those will you have?
> How fast will they complete?
>
> David J.
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alban Hertroys | 2016-01-07 08:04:47 | Re: Definitive answer: can functions use indexes? |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-01-07 05:55:10 | Re: RAM of Postgres Server |