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

Re: choosing the right platform

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
To: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
Cc: Matthew Nuzum <cobalt(at)bearfruit(dot)org>,Pgsql-Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: choosing the right platform
Date: 2003-04-22 08:30:58
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 10:42:35AM -0600, scott.marlowe wrote:
> The difference between SIZE and SHARE is the delta, which is only 
> something like 3 or 4 megs for the initial select * from logs, but the 
> second one is only 1 meg.  On average, the actual increase in memory usage 
> for postgresql isn't that great, usually about 1 meg.
> Running out of memory isn't really a problem with connections<=200 and 1 
> gig of ram, as long as sort_mem isn't too high.  I/O contention is the 
> killer at that point, as is CPU load.
Except you should consider what you could be doing with that 200M, ie:
caching data. Even something as small as 1M per connection starts to add
Jim C. Nasby (aka Decibel!)                    jim(at)nasby(dot)net
Member: Triangle Fraternity, Sports Car Club of America
Give your computer some brain candy! Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2003-04-22 08:33:27
Subject: Re: [SQL] Yet Another (Simple) Case of Index not used
Previous:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2003-04-22 08:23:39
Subject: Re: [SQL] Yet Another (Simple) Case of Index not used

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group