From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Craig James <craig_james(at)emolecules(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: FSM - per database or per installation? |
Date: | 2009-12-24 03:32:47 |
Message-ID: | 4B32E0DF.40503@postnewspapers.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 20/11/2009 2:33 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Craig James wrote:
>> Are the FSM parameters for each database, or the entire Postgres
>> system? In other words, if I have 100 databases, do I need to increase
>> max_fsm_pages and max_fsm_relations by a factor of 100, or keep them the
>> same as if I just have one database?
>>
>> I suspect they're per-database, i.e. as I add databases, I don't have to
>> increase the FSM parameters, but the documentation isn't 100% clear on
>> this point.
>
> It's per cluster, ie *not* per-database.
>
> The parameter is gone in 8.4, BTW.
See:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/release-8-4.html#AEN95067
for why they've been removed, which boils down to "PostgreSQL manages
the fsm automatically now and no longer requires all that RAM to do it,
either".
Thanks Heikki - the fsm _really_ simplify admin and remove a bunch of
common gotchas for Pg users.
--
Craig Ringer
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Ruf | 2009-12-24 09:38:21 | Optimizer use of index slows down query by factor |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-12-24 02:07:15 | Re: FSM - per database or per installation? |