| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gary DeSorbo <isasitis(at)uchicago(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: DB Performance |
| Date: | 2002-11-01 18:04:37 |
| Message-ID: | 27429.1036173877@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Gary DeSorbo <isasitis(at)uchicago(dot)edu> writes:
> Postgres is configured as follows:
> sort_mem = 128672
> shared_buffers = 60800
> fsync = false
Yipes. Back off that sort_mem setting --- that's 128M *per sort*,
which will undoubtedly run you out of memory (or at least into serious
swapping) as soon as several processes try to do concurrent sorts.
Something in the vicinity of 5 or 10 meg is probably more reasonable.
If you have multiple drives consider relocating the WAL (pg_xlog/)
onto a different drive, preferably one that normally doesn't touch
anything but WAL.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | mallah | 2002-11-01 18:09:06 | Re: DB Performance |
| Previous Message | Gary DeSorbo | 2002-11-01 17:56:09 | DB Performance |