Martin Foster wrote:
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Let start from your postgres configuration:
shared_buffers = 8192 <==== This is really too small for your
sort_mem = 2048
wal_buffers = 128 <==== This is really too small for your
effective_cache_size = 16000
change this values in:
shared_buffers = 50000
sort_mem = 16084
wal_buffers = 1500
effective_cache_size = 32000
to bump up the shm usage you have to configure your OS in order to be
allowed to use that ammount of SHM.
This are the numbers that I feel good for your HW, the second step now is
analyze your queries
These changes have yielded some visible improvements, with load averages
rarely going over the anything noticeable. However, I do have a
question on the matter, why do these values seem to be far higher then
what a frequently pointed to document would indicate as necessary?
I am simply curious, as this clearly shows that my understanding of
PostgreSQL is clearly lacking when it comes to tweaking for the hardware.
Unfortunately there is no a "wizard tuning" for postgres so each one of
us have a own "school". The data I gave you are oversized to be sure
to achieve improvements. Now you can start to decrease these values
( starting from the wal_buffers ) in order to find the good compromise
with your HW.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])