Re: Confusion on shared buffer

From: S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Confusion on shared buffer
Date: 2009-10-03 06:11:41
Message-ID: abf9211d0910022311n26b86d38y6928b1aec8c4c9c9@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Thanks Robert,
So for our scenario what is the most important factor to be noted
for performance.

-Arvind S

On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 4:11 AM, S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > In some docs i read that shared buffer must be increased based on the
> > maximum dataset size. For my scenario the dataset size is relative small
> > less then a Gb, but database# handled by a server is nearly 200db per
> > server and average connection# to server will be >500 (approx 5/per each
> > DB). So for this scenario will increase in shared buffer will increase
> the
> > performance.
> > FYI: RAM in 8GB
>
> I'm pretty sure that won't help to make shared buffers larger than the
> size of your entire cluster.
>
> ...Robert
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-10-04 01:02:12 Re: Confusion on shared buffer
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-10-03 02:35:41 Re: dump time increase by 1h with new kernel