Martin Foster wrote:

Gaetano Mendola wrote:

Let start from your postgres configuration:

shared_buffers = 8192 <==== This is really too small for your configuration
sort_mem = 2048

wal_buffers = 128 <==== This is really too small for your configuration

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.

Regards Gaetano Mendola

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
   (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])

Reply via email to