| From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jack Coates <jack(at)lyris(dot)com>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: tuning questions |
| Date: | 2003-12-04 20:27:22 |
| Message-ID: | 200312042027.22223.dev@archonet.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Thursday 04 December 2003 19:50, Jack Coates wrote:
>
> I'm trying to set Postgres's shared memory usage in a fashion that
> allows it to return requested results quickly. Unfortunately, none of
> these changes allow PG to use more than a little under 300M RAM.
> vacuumdb --analyze is now taking an inordinate amount of time as well
> (40 minutes and counting), so that change needs to be rolled back.
You don't want PG to use all your RAM, it's designed to let the underlying OS
do a lot of caching for it. Probably worth having a look at vmstat/iostat and
see if it's saturating on I/O.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Manfred Koizar | 2003-12-04 20:27:39 | Re: Transaction Question |
| Previous Message | Jack Coates | 2003-12-04 19:50:55 | Re: tuning questions |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jack Coates | 2003-12-04 20:37:45 | Re: tuning questions |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2003-12-04 20:23:36 | Re: Slow UPADTE, compared to INSERT |