From: | Gipsz Jakab <clausewitz45(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL + FreeBSD memory configuration, and an issue |
Date: | 2011-04-08 17:40:17 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTikV+whHxiXVwJvpotvswao_WAKK7Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Ok Vick, thanks, and sorry for the off-list message.
regards,
Carl
2011/4/8 Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Gipsz Jakab <clausewitz45(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:
>
>> Thanks Vick, I'll try it tonight. I will give 1024 shared_buffers and
>> maintenance_work_mem, and 102 MB of work_mem.
>>
>> A question: I didn't use (it's marked with #) the effective_planner (or
>> any other planner method or config option). Is it ok, when I turn it on with
>> that parameter: 1036MB?
>>
>>
> the variables below are all the ones I change from default other than the
> logging settings (I like more verbose logging).
>
> I have no opinion or experiences on any other settings.
>
>
>>
>> DROP/ADD TABLE stuck: I realized, that the locks number is so high, what
>> about these settings:
>>
>>
> I don't think it has to do with number of locks, but with actually waiting
> for a lock.
>
>
>> deadlock_timeout = 1s
>> max_locks_per_transaction = 64
>>
>> is it ok? or is it too high?
>>
>
> That depends really on your application's needs. I wouldn't change it
> unless you get warnings that you are hitting this limit.
>
>
> Please keep the message on-list.
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Diego Schulz | 2011-04-08 17:56:04 | Re: Changed SSL Certificates |
Previous Message | Carlos Mennens | 2011-04-08 17:21:11 | Re: Changed SSL Certificates |