Re: Shared_buffers hint

From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Rafael Domiciano" <rafael(dot)domiciano(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Shared_buffers hint
Date: 2008-10-06 14:06:01
Message-ID: dcc563d10810060706p302a2ec6rb6e84c5a1d8ef5c3@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Rafael Domiciano
<rafael(dot)domiciano(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm using 8.3.3 version in this machine..!
> So, the shared_buffers set to 100Mb is ok? Or 500Mb is better?
> This server we call "Reporter Server", so it's used to do heavy reports for
> a few users only (I could say 5 users).
> What could be the best config for my server with:
> 2 Gb RAM
> 300 GB HD
> Postgres 8.3
> Dual Core

100M is probably adequate. 2G is a pretty small database server
memory wise. I assume by 300G HD you mean a single hard drive. Since
a single hard drive is going to limit the speed at which you can
access data from it, I'd leave shared_buffers at 100M and let the OS
cache data for you. Also, look at work_mem. You might want to set
those few heavy users to have more work_mem than the other users.

alter user heavyuser set work_mem=128000;

note that work_mem is per user sort, so it's quite possible to exhaust
main memory if you set it high for everybody and they all do sorts on
large sets suddenly.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2008-10-06 14:08:23 Re: Postgres database as a client/server architecture
Previous Message Rafael Domiciano 2008-10-06 13:56:51 Re: Shared_buffers hint