Hi, All!
Richard Huxton wrote:
On Thursday 07 August 2003 17:30, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
On Thursday 07 August 2003 09:24, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
PG's memory use can be split into four areas (note - I'm not a developer so
this could be wrong).
1. Shared memory -
Hi All!
I have installed PostgreSQL 7.3.2 on FreeBSD 4.7, running on PC with
CPU Pentium II 400MHz and 384Mb RAM.
Problem is that SQL statement (see below) is running too long. With
current WHERE clause 'SUBSTR(2, 2) IN ('NL', 'NM') return 25 records.
With 1 record, SELECT time is about
On Thursday 07 August 2003 17:30, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
Hi All!
First, thanks for answers!
Richard Huxton wrote:
On Thursday 07 August 2003 09:24, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
IIRC there is a limit on filesystem cache on freeBSD. 300MB by default.
If that is the case, you might have
Mem: 71M Active, 23M Inact, 72M Wired, 436K Cache, 48M Buf, 208M Free
Swap: 368M Total, 2852K Used, 366M Free
It's right that I can figure that I can use 384M (total RAM) - 72M
(wired) - 48M (buf) = 264M for PostgreSQL.
Hence, if I set effective_cache_size to 24M (3072 8K
On Thursday 07 August 2003 09:24, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
IIRC there is a limit on filesystem cache on freeBSD. 300MB by default.
If that is the case, you might have to raise it to make
effective_cache_size really effective..
Try various sysctls says nothing for me. I want use *all
Yaroslav Mazurak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fsync = false
I'd turn fsync back on - unless you don't mind losing your data after a crash.
This is temporary performance solution - I want get SELECT query result
first, but current performance is too low.
Disabling fsync will not help
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 08:34, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
Hi All!
I have installed PostgreSQL 7.3.2 on FreeBSD 4.7, running on PC with
CPU Pentium II 400MHz and 384Mb RAM.
Version 7.3.4 is just out - probably worth upgrading as soon as it's
convenient.
Problem
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
Hi All!
Richard Huxton wrote:
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 08:34, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
sort_mem = 131072
This sort_mem value is *very* large - that's 131MB for *each sort* that
It's not TOO large *for PostgreSQL*.
Hi All!
First, thanks for answers!
Richard Huxton wrote:
On Thursday 07 August 2003 09:24, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
IIRC there is a limit on filesystem cache on freeBSD. 300MB by default.
If that is the case, you might have to raise it to make
effective_cache_size really effective..
Hi All!
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On 7 Aug 2003 at 10:05, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
It needs to reflect how much cache the system is using - try the free
command to see figures.
I'm not found free utility on FreeBSD 4.7. :(
rant
Grr.. I don't like freeBSD for it's top
Hi All!
Richard Huxton wrote:
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 08:34, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
sort_mem = 131072
This sort_mem value is *very* large - that's 131MB for *each sort* that
It's not TOO large *for PostgreSQL*. When I'm inserting a large amount
of data into tables, sort_mem helps.
Hi All!
Tom Lane wrote:
Yaroslav Mazurak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fsync = false
I'd turn fsync back on - unless you don't mind losing your data after a crash.
This is temporary performance solution - I want get SELECT query result
first, but current performance is too low.
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 12:04, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
scott.marlowe wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Yaroslav Mazurak wrote:
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
[snip]
My guess is that this is exactly what's happening to you, you're using so
much memory that the machine is running out and slowing
13 matches
Mail list logo
