| From: | "Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej(dot)groups(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "sathiya psql" <sathiya(dot)psql(at)gmail(dot)com>, bitaoxiao <bitaoxiao(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Max shared_buffers |
| Date: | 2008-04-03 17:16:22 |
| Message-ID: | b35603930804031016k4f1d2c28x1753da0e7cc7c651@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 04/04/2008, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Not entirely true. on 32 bit OS / software, the limit is just under 2
> Gig.
Where do you get that figure from?
There's an architectural (theoretical) limitation of RAM at 4GB,
but with the PAE (that pretty much any CPU since the Pentium Pro
offers) one can happily address 64GB on 32-bit.
Or are you talking about some Postgres limitation?
Cheers,
Andrej
--
Please don't top post, and don't use HTML e-Mail :} Make your quotes concise.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew | 2008-04-03 17:20:46 | Re: Max shared_buffers |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2008-04-03 16:49:17 | Re: Max shared_buffers |