On Aug 4, 2011, at 10:07 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Kevin Grittner > <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: >>> RAM : 16 GB >> >>> effective_cache_size = 4096MB >> >> That should probably be more like 12GB to 15GB. It probably won't >> affect the load time here, but could affect other queries. > > Actually on a heavily written database a large effective cache size > makes things slower.
effective_cache_size or shared_buffers? I can see why a large shared_buffers could cause problems, but what effect does effective_cache_size have on a write workload? -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect j...@nasby.net 512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
