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

Re: Memory taken by FSM_relations

From: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,<pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Memory taken by FSM_relations
Date: 2003-02-24 19:34:00
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.33.0302241233340.14019-100000@css120.ihs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Joe Conway wrote:

> Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Further, Joe Conway gave me a guesstimate of 6k per max_fsm_pages which seems 
> > rather high ... in fact, the default settings for this value (10000) would 
> > swamp the memory used by the rest of Postgres.
> 
> I don't recall (and cannot find in my sent mail) ever making that 
> guesstimate. Can you provide some context?

If I remember right, it was 6 BYTES per max fsm pages...  not kbytes.  
That sounds about right anyway.


In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Larry RosenmanDate: 2003-02-24 19:35:34
Subject: Re: Memory taken by FSM_relations
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2003-02-24 19:25:38
Subject: Re: Memory taken by FSM_relations

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