From: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, "MindTerm" <mindterm(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: performance tuning in large function / transaction |
Date: | 2001-12-14 03:43:59 |
Message-ID: | GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOAEMGCAAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Hmmm...
I have a database server for a website for which I am 'dedicating' at least
128MB of ram (I could say that it can have 256MB)
I have max_connections 64
and shared_buffers 256
and sort_mem 1024
Is that really small?
I have this SHM config:
options SYSVSHM
options SYSVMSG
options SYSVSEM
options SHMMAXPGS=16384 # 64MB shared mem?
#options SHMALL=1025 # max kb of shared mem
options SHMSEG=256 # 256 shared segs per proc
options SEMMNI=256 # 256 semaphore identifiers
options SEMMNS=512 # 512 semaphores in the system
options SEMMNU=256 # 256 undo structures in system
options SEMMAP=256 # 256 entries in semaphore map
How do you calculate the shared memory required by postgres given the
shared_buffers value???
Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-sql-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-sql-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of Stephan Szabo
> Sent: Friday, 14 December 2001 11:02 AM
> To: MindTerm
> Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [SQL] performance tuning in large function / transaction
>
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, MindTerm wrote:
>
> > I am writing a function (plpgsql) which equals to a
> > single transaction transaction in postgresql ( as I
> > known ). So I think that it is not a autocommmit mode.
> >
> > I have add following lines in postgresql.conf.
> >
> > postgresql.conf:
> > ====================
> > shared_buffers = 640
> > wal_buffers = 80
>
> It depends on how much memory you have, but even 640 is pretty
> low (I think that works out to 5M). Probably a few thousand
> is better if you've got the ram.
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2001-12-14 06:40:57 | Re: performance tuning in large function / transaction |
Previous Message | MindTerm | 2001-12-14 03:34:28 | Re: performance tuning in large function / transaction |