From: | Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL + FreeBSD memory configuration, and an issue |
Date: | 2011-04-08 14:05:35 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTinkGs-MMXD24wb3SCLnF1uhF99Grg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Gipsz Jakab <clausewitz45(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks Vick, I'll try it tonight. I will give 1024 shared_buffers and
> maintenance_work_mem, and 102 MB of work_mem.
>
> A question: I didn't use (it's marked with #) the effective_planner (or any
> other planner method or config option). Is it ok, when I turn it on with
> that parameter: 1036MB?
>
>
the variables below are all the ones I change from default other than the
logging settings (I like more verbose logging).
I have no opinion or experiences on any other settings.
>
> DROP/ADD TABLE stuck: I realized, that the locks number is so high, what
> about these settings:
>
>
I don't think it has to do with number of locks, but with actually waiting
for a lock.
> deadlock_timeout = 1s
> max_locks_per_transaction = 64
>
> is it ok? or is it too high?
>
That depends really on your application's needs. I wouldn't change it
unless you get warnings that you are hitting this limit.
Please keep the message on-list.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gipsz Jakab | 2011-04-08 14:07:59 | Re: PostgreSQL + FreeBSD memory configuration, and an issue |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2011-04-08 13:33:17 | Re: PostgreSQL backend process high memory usage issue |