| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Dave Cramer" <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, "Guillaume Cottenceau" <gc(at)mnc(dot)ch>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed |
| Date: | 2006-09-05 13:31:59 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150609050631o71806eer6a2467e2355ddcea@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 9/1/06, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think 'shared buffers' is one of the most overrated settings from a
> >> performance standpoint. however you must ensure there is enough for
> >> things the server does besides caching. It used to be a bigger deal
> >> than it is in modern versionf of postgresql modern operating systems.
>
> Previous to 8.1 I would agree with you, but as of 8.1 it is probably the
> most underrated.
really? what are the relative advantages of raising shared buffers? I
was thinking maybe there might be less context switches in high load
environments...I'm really curious what you have to say here.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2006-09-05 18:12:46 | Re: increasing shared buffers: how much should be removed |
| Previous Message | Wei Song | 2006-09-05 06:31:24 | Re: Hanging queries on Windows 2003 SP1 |