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

Re: shared_buffers advice

From: Dave Crooke <dcrooke(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Paul McGarry <paul(at)paulmcgarry(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: shared_buffers advice
Date: 2010-05-28 21:14:18
Message-ID: AANLkTimvyRfRY2TT9WV18VlC3rUKYj_2iKYWBGneHc1Q@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
If, like me, you came from the Oracle world, you may be tempted to throw a
ton of RAM at this. Don't. PG does not like it.

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:

> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > *) shared_buffers is one of the _least_ important performance settings
> > in postgresql.conf
>
> Yes, and no.  It's usually REALLY helpful to make sure it's more than
> 8 or 24Megs.  But it doesn't generally need to be huge to make a
> difference.
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2010-05-28 21:16:01
Subject: Re: shared_buffers advice
Previous:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2010-05-28 21:11:15
Subject: Re: shared_buffers advice

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