From: | Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Wilcox <hungrytom(at)googlemail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: requested shared memory size overflows size_t |
Date: | 2010-06-03 02:27:46 |
Message-ID: | 4c071324.8c43e70a.4d42.65bf@mx.google.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 11:58:47AM +0100, Tom Wilcox wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry to revive an old thread but I have had this error whilst trying to
> configure my 32-bit build of postgres to run on a 64-bit Windows Server
> 2008 machine with 96GB of RAM (that I would very much like to use with
> postgres).
>
> I am getting:
>
> 2010-06-02 11:34:09 BSTFATAL: requested shared memory size overflows size_t
> 2010-06-02 11:41:01 BSTFATAL: could not create shared memory segment: 8
> 2010-06-02 11:41:01 BSTDETAIL: Failed system call was MapViewOfFileEx.
>
> which makes a lot of sense since I was setting shared_buffers (and
> effective_cache_size) to values like 60GB..
I realize other answers have already been given on this thread; I figured I'd
just refer to the manual, which says, "The useful range for shared_buffers on
Windows systems is generally from 64MB to 512MB." [1]
[1] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/runtime-config-resource.html
--
Joshua Tolley / eggyknap
End Point Corporation
http://www.endpoint.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthew Wakeling | 2010-06-03 10:15:45 | Re: SELECT ignoring index even though ORDER BY and LIMIT present |
Previous Message | Bob Lunney | 2010-06-03 01:49:08 | Re: SELECT ignoring index even though ORDER BY and LIMIT present |