From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Matthew Nuzum" <cobalt(at)bearfruit(dot)org>, "'Pgsql-Performance'" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Caching (was Re: choosing the right platform) |
Date: | 2003-04-10 03:45:29 |
Message-ID: | 200304092045.29503.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Matthew,
> ** Postgres is multi-process, not multi-threaded (?)
Correct.
> ** It's better to not use huge amount of sort-mem but instead let the OS do
> the caching (?)
That's "don't use a huge amount of *shared_buffers*". Sort_mem is a different
setting. However, I have never seen a database use more than 32mb sort mem
in a single process, so I don't think the 2GB limit will hurt you much ...
> ** My needs are really not going to be as big as I think they are if I
> manage the application/environment correctly (?)
Your needs *per process*. Also, PostgreSQL is not as much of a consumer of
RAM as it is a consumer of disk I/O.
> * FreeBSD is going to provide a better file system than Linux (because
> Linux only supports large files on journaling filesystems which impose
> extra over head) (this gleaned from this conversation and previous threads
> in archives)
No, the jury is still out on this one. ReiserFS is optimized for small
files, and I've done well with it although some posters report stability
problems, though all second-hand. We hope to test this sometime in the
upcoming months.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2003-04-10 08:17:59 | Re: Caching (was Re: choosing the right platform) |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-04-10 03:39:00 | Re: Help analyzing 7.2.4 EXPLAIN |