From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Different memory allocation strategy in Postgres 11? |
Date: | 2018-10-26 15:42:59 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1xedG=UBiUXtR+XMgeKdtep=9DxyOgWVMjW7QXFP3yP6g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 9:12 AM Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> I have a Postgres instance running on my Windows laptop for testing
> purposes.
>
> I typically configure "shared_buffers = 4096MB" on my 16GB system as
> sometimes when testing, it pays off to have a bigger cache.
>
> With Postgres 10 and earlier, the Postgres process(es) would only allocate
> that memory from the operating system when needed.
> So right after startup, it would only consume several hundred MB, not the
> entire 4GB
>
> However with Postgres 11 I noticed that it immediately grabs the complete
> memory configured for shared_buffers during startup.
>
> It's not really a big deal, but I wonder if that is an intentional change
> or a result from something else?
>
Do you have pg_prewarm in shared_preload_libraries?
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2018-10-26 15:59:17 | Re: GIN Index for low cardinality |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2018-10-26 14:54:37 | Re: Should pg 11 use a lot more memory building an spgist index? |