Re: max_connections/shared_buffers (was Re: Beta4 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Adam Witney <awitney(at)sghms(dot)ac(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: max_connections/shared_buffers (was Re: Beta4 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
Date: 2003-10-06 17:26:35
Message-ID: 29409.1065461195@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Anyone see a better way?

> Maybe just run one loop and try pairs of (shared_buffers, max_connections):
> (1000, 100) (800, 50) (600, 40) (400, 30) (200, 20) (50, 10)

Hmm ... that wouldn't work real well as-is, because if max_connections
is being constrained by a limit on SysV semaphores, we could find
ourselves restricting shared_buffers to no purpose.

Would it work to loop as above, and then try a second loop in which we
use the selected max_connections and see if we can make shared_buffers
bigger?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2003-10-06 17:35:52 db encoding
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-10-06 17:21:43 Re: max_connections/shared_buffers (was Re: Beta4 Tag'd