There are many reports of kernel problems with memory allocation (too agressive) and swap issues with RHEL 3.0 on both RAID and non-RAID systems. I hope folks have worked through all those issues before blaming postgresql.
Tom Lane wrote:
If I thought that a 200% error in memory usage were cause for a Chinese fire drill, then I'd say "yeah, let's do that". The problem is that the place where performance actually goes into the toilet is normally an order of magnitude or two above the nominal sort_mem setting (for obvious reasons: admins can't afford to push the envelope on sort_mem because of the various unpredictable multiples that may apply). So switching to a hugely more expensive implementation as soon as we exceed some arbitrary limit is likely to be a net loss not a win.
If you can think of a spill methodology that has a gentle degradation curve, then I'm all for that. But I doubt there are any quick-hack improvements to be had here.
regards, tom lane
-- P. J. "Josh" Rovero Sonalysts, Inc. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.sonalysts.com 215 Parkway North Work: (860)326-3671 or 442-4355 Waterford CT 06385 ***********************************************************************
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
