| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jeremy Palmer <JPalmer(at)linz(dot)govt(dot)nz>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Win32 Backend Cash - pre-existing shared memory block is still in use |
| Date: | 2010-08-25 05:28:29 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinoBPesQtX=4bc3sJ8Ng5MGS4kiudd0MQ8BNcb_@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> 512M is still REALLY high for a 32 bit postgresql. Have you tried
>> something in the 16Meg range?
>
> Cutting his value for shared_buffers (currently about 800MB) might be
> wise too. I'm not sure what the effectively available address space
> for a win32 process is, but if there's any inefficiency in the way
> the address space is laid out, those numbers could be enough to be
> trouble.
I believe it's limited to 3Gigs.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeremy Palmer | 2010-08-25 05:30:39 | Re: Win32 Backend Cash - pre-existing shared memory block is still in use |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-25 05:23:19 | Re: Win32 Backend Cash - pre-existing shared memory block is still in use |