Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: appropriate sort_mem & shared buffers

From: Francisco Reyes <lists(at)natserv(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Markus Bertheau <twanger(at)bluetwanger(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Novice <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: appropriate sort_mem & shared buffers
Date: 2001-12-31 18:02:43
Message-ID: 20011231125357.F2831-100000@zoraida.natserv.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice
On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> > I was thinking that the higher the
> > buffer size the longer it would take for the database to allocate the
> > memory before it can serve the query.
>
> No.  The shared buffers are a static allocation that is made once when
> the postmaster starts.

The web site is using PHP so a connection is stablished every time. The
little I have read little about permanent(persistent?) connections seems
so will look into that later. After this is in production I will start
looking at the archives of the pgsql-php list to see the current state of
php permanent connections.

So if PHP is stablishing a new connection every time isn't a new instance
of the backend, toghether with the overhead of allocating memory space,
been started?

On the apache web server one can have a few instances running waiting for
requests. Can that be done with pgsql, or does it even make sense to have
such arrangement on pgsql?


In response to

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Kris-Jon FentonDate: 2002-01-02 05:11:04
Subject: Random Select from PostgreSQL db
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-12-31 17:13:12
Subject: Re: appropriate sort_mem & shared buffers

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group