Re: PostgreSQL Database performance

> On Sep 6, 2016, at 12:08 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Pradeep <pgundala(at)avineonindia(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> max_connections = 100
>> shared_buffers = 512MB
>> effective_cache_size = 24GB
>> work_mem = 110100kB
>
> This is WAY too high for work_mem. Work_mem is how much memory a
> single sort can grab at once. Each query may run > 1 sort, and you
> could have 100 queries running at once.
>
> This setting is 110GB. That's about 109.9GB too high for safety. When
> things go wrong with this too big, they go very wrong, sending the
> machine into a swap storm from which it may not return.

It's an oddly spelled 110MB, which doesn't seem unreasonable.

>
> It's far more likely that you've just got poorly written queries. I'd
> make a post with explain analyze output etc. Here's a good resource
> for reporting slow queries:
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Slow_Query_Questions

+1

Cheers,
Steve