Merlin Moncure [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
May I make a suggestion that maybe it is time to start thinking about
tuning the default config file, IMHO its just a little bit too
conservative,
It's a lot too conservative. I've been thinking for awhile that we
should adjust the defaults.
The
On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 11:20:14AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
...
We could retarget to try to stay under SHMMAX=4M, which I think is
the next boundary that's significant in terms of real-world platforms
(isn't that the default SHMMAX on some BSDen?).
...
Assuming 1 page = 4k, and number of pages
A quick-'n'-dirty first step would be more comments in postgresql.conf. Most
of the lines are commented out which would imply use the default but the
default is not shown. (I realize this has the difficulty of defaults that
change depending upon how PostgreSQL was configured/compiled but
Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Personally I'd be a bunch happier if we set the buffers so high that we
definitely have decent performance, and the people that want to run
PostgreSQL are forced to make the choice of either:
1) Adjust their system settings to allow PostgreSQL to run
FYI, my stock linux 2.4.19 gentoo kernel has:
kernel.shmall = 2097152
kernel.shmmax = 33554432
sysctl -a
So it appears that linux at least is way above your 8 meg point, unless I
am missing something.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you
Jon Griffin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So it appears that linux at least is way above your 8 meg point, unless I
am missing something.
Yeah, AFAIK all recent Linuxen are well above the range of parameters
that I was suggesting (and even if they weren't, Linux is particularly
easy to change the
Matthew T. O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... So we ship postgresql.conf with 32M of
shared memory and auto_shared_mem_reduction = true. With a comment that
the administrator might want to turn this off for production.
This really doesn't address Justin's point about clueless
