On 11 March 2010 16:16, Ben Chobot wrote:
> I *can* say a 10GB shared_buffer value is working "well" with my 128GB of
> RAM. whether or not it's "optimal," I couldn't say without a lot of
> experimentation I can't afford to do right now. You might have a look at the
> pg_buffercache contri
Hi there,
I'm after a little bit of advice on the shared_buffers setting (I have
read the various docs on/linked from the performance tuning wiki page,
some very helpful stuff there so thanks to those people).
I am setting up a 64bit Linux server running Postgresql 8.3, the
server has 64gigs of m
Hi there,
I'm after a little bit of advice on the shared_buffers setting (I have
read the various docs on/linked from the performance tuning wiki page,
some very helpful stuff there so thanks to those people).
I am setting up a 64bit Linux server running Postgresql 8.3, the
server has 64gigs of m
On 6/1/05, Mark Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cosimo Streppone wrote:
> > # Config
> >> /etc/sysctl.conf:
> >> kernel.shmall = 786432000
> >> kernel.shmmax = 786432000
> >
> > I think you have a problem here.
> > kernel.shmmax should *not* be set to an amount of RAM, bu
