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

Re: How does PG know if data is in memory?

From: Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Samuel Gendler <sgendler(at)ideasculptor(dot)com>, Fabrício dos Anjos Silva <fabricio(dot)silva(at)linkcom(dot)com(dot)br>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: How does PG know if data is in memory?
Date: 2010-10-28 15:31:29
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
2010/10/28 Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>:
> Greg Smith writes:
>> heard privately from two people who have done similar experiments on Linux
>> and found closer to 8GB to be the point where performance started
> So on a machine with 72GB is 8GB still the recommended value?

Yes, as a maximum, not a minimum. (Some applications will work better
with less shared_buffers than others)

> Usually have only 10 to 20 connections.
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:

Cédric Villemain               2ndQuadrant     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Cédric VillemainDate: 2010-10-28 15:37:28
Subject: Re: Massive update, memory usage
Previous:From: Jesper KroghDate: 2010-10-28 15:28:53
Subject: Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle

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