From: | "Campbell, Lance" <lance(at)uiuc(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: work_mem and shared_buffers |
Date: | 2007-11-09 18:08:57 |
Message-ID: | B10E6810AC2A2F4EA7550D072CDE8760197DE5@SAB-FENWICK.sab.uiuc.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
How do you know when you should up the value of work_mem? Just play
with the number. Is there a query I could do that would tell me if
PostgreSql is performing SQL that could use more memory for sorting?
Thanks,
Lance Campbell
Project Manager/Software Architect
Web Services at Public Affairs
University of Illinois
217.333.0382
http://webservices.uiuc.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: Heikki Linnakangas [mailto:hlinnaka(at)gmail(dot)com] On Behalf Of Heikki
Linnakangas
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 11:57 AM
To: Campbell, Lance
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] work_mem and shared_buffers
Campbell, Lance wrote:
> Does the amount of memory allocate to work_mem get subtracted from
> shared_buffers?
>
> Example:
>
> If work_mem is 1M and there are 10 connections and shared_buffers is
> 100M then would the total be 90 M left for shared_buffers?
>
> Or does the amount of memory allocated for work_mem have nothing to do
> with shared_buffers?
No, they're completely separate.
Note that a connection can use more than work_mem of memory. For
example, if you run a query with multiple Sort or hash-nodes, each such
node allocates up to work_mem of memory.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bill Moran | 2007-11-09 19:04:54 | Re: PostgreSQL vs MySQL, and FreeBSD |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-11-09 18:03:20 | Re: dell versus hp |