Re: Question about maintenance_work_mem and shared_buffer

From: Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
To: "Rodrigo Barboza *EXTERN*" <rodrigombufrj(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Question about maintenance_work_mem and shared_buffer
Date: 2013-05-22 09:14:19
Message-ID: A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B05820995@ntex2010a.host.magwien.gv.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Rodrigo Barboza wrote:
> I have a doubt.
> I have a 32-bit postrgesql running with 2.5gb of shared_buffer.
> And I have maintenance_work_mem = 1gb and autovacuum_max_workers = 3.
> How maintenance_work_mem is related to shared_buffer?
> If the 3 workers uses 1gb, will the database crash?
> Or their memory usage are separated from each other?

Your doubt is quite in place, as a process on a 32-bit architecture
cannot address more than 4GB of memory.

See http://rhaas.blogspot.jp/2011/05/sharedbuffers-on-32-bit-systems.html

shared_buffers plus the private memory of a backend shouldn't
exceed 3GB.

So I'd go for shared_buffers = 2GB and maintenance_work_mem much
smaller than 1GB.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message lakkireddy 2013-05-22 10:04:55 Re: Query is stuck
Previous Message Dev Kumkar 2013-05-22 06:28:16 Re: [ODBC] ODBC constructs