On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:35:31 -0400, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I suspect that fooling with shared_buffers is entirely the wrong tree > for you to be barking up. My suggestion is to be looking at individual > queries that are slow, and seeing how to speed those up. This might > involve adding indexes, or tweaking the query source, or adjusting > planner parameters, or several other things. EXPLAIN ANALYZE is your > friend ... > > regards, tom lane
Only problem is, a "select count(1)" is taking a long time. Indexes shouldn't matter with this since it's counting every row, right? The tables are fairly well indexed also, I could probably add a few more. If shared_buffers isn't the way to go ( you said 10k is the sweetspot ), then what about the effective_cache_size? I was suggested on the general list about possibly setting that to 75% of ram. Thanks. -Josh ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
