On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 4:26 PM, David Jarvis <thanga...@gmail.com> wrote: > shared_buffers = 1GB > temp_buffers = 32MB > work_mem = 32MB > maintenance_work_mem = 64MB > effective_cache_size = 256MB
Shouldn't effective_cache_size be significantly larger? -- Rob Wultsch wult...@gmail.com -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
