Re: [PERFORM] Any issues with my tuning...

2003-10-14 Thread Neil Conway
On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 15:43, David Griffiths wrote: > Here are part of the contents of my sysctl.conf file (note that I've > played with values as low as 60 with no difference) > kernel.shmmax=14 > kernel.shmall=14 This is only a system-wide limit -- it either allows the share

Re: [PERFORM] Any issues with my tuning...

2003-10-13 Thread Josh Berkus
David, > shared_buffers = 96000 # min max_connections*2 or 16, 8KB each This seems a little high to me, even for 2gb RAM. What % of your available RAM does it work out to? > effective_cache_size = 6000 # typically 8KB each This is very, very low. Given your hardware, I'd set it

Re: [PERFORM] Any issues with my tuning...

2003-10-13 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 14:43, David Griffiths wrote: > I've been having performance issues with Postgres (sequential scans vs > index scans in an update statement). I've read that optimizer will > change it's plan based on the resources it thinks are available. In > addition, I've read alot of confl

[PERFORM] Any issues with my tuning...

2003-10-13 Thread David Griffiths
I've been having performance issues with Postgres (sequential scans vs index scans in an update statement). I've read that optimizer will change it's plan based on the resources it thinks are available. In addition, I've read alot of conflicting info on various parameters, so I'd like to sor