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

Re: memory allocation ; postgresql-8.0

From: "Kavan, Dan (IMS)" <KavanD(at)imsweb(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: "Scott Marlowe" <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>
Subject: Re: memory allocation ; postgresql-8.0
Date: 2005-05-12 17:46:27
Message-ID: 782D2A81EC812642B857B03B506E0B4432648C@granite.omni.imsweb.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
Do psql calls/procedures access resources reserved from the
kernel.shmmax?
How about the tar or copy sysadmin commands?  I would guess they don't
use kernel.shmmax resources.  Finally, work memory alos does not access
resources reserved from kernel.shmmax, correct?  Thanks for clearing
things up.




-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Marlowe [mailto:smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:21 AM
To: Kavan, Dan (IMS)
Cc: postgres
Subject: RE: [ADMIN] memory allocation ; postgresql-8.0


On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 10:10, Kavan, Dan (IMS) wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Thanks again for all your tips.
> 
> If I knock the buffer size down to 65,536 (still higher than what you 
> are recommending)  then my shmmax becomes: 256,000 + 550,292,685 
> (65536*8396.8) + 1,454,100 = 552,002,785
> 
> That will leave me with 3.5 GB of free memory for the system & work 
> memory to use. Will those free system resources ever get used with a 
> 10 million record, 10 GB database?

Certainly.  As you access the data the kernel will cache all the data
sent through it.  Once the machine's been up and processing for a while
you should see a top output that shows "free" memory at a few megs (8 to
30 meg is typical) and all the rest of the memory being used as kernel
cache.

> If I go with 65,536 as my buffer size, Would having the SHMMAX set to 
> 1 GB on my sysctl.conf system parameters allow me to run two seperate 
> instances of postgresql on 2 seperate ports?

Yes, but you may want to set it just a tad higher for things like fsm
and whatnot.

Definitely benchmark both the 64k setting of shared_buffers and lower
settings, looking for a knee with your data set.  It may well be that
the best performance happens at a lower number, and doesn't really
increase as you bump up the shared_buffers.  Be sure to test things as
realistically as possible, i.e. the right amount of parallel users and
all that.

Responses

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Kavan, Dan (IMS)Date: 2005-05-12 17:56:34
Subject: Re: resource allocation ; postgresql-8.0
Previous:From: Vishal Kashyap @ [SaiHertz]Date: 2005-05-12 17:26:14
Subject: Compile Error for postgresql-8.0.3

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