Yes, Claudio. You got it.
But Rob seems to have already answered the confusion between 32 and 64 bits
for effective_cache_size.
Actually I am creating generic configuration based on physical memory.
So I wanna be conservative about effective_cache_size. That's why I'm
following postgres tuning webs
2013/3/18 Kevin Grittner :
> Rodrigo Barboza wrote:
>
>> So setting this as half of ram, as suggested in postgres tuning
>> webpage should be safe?
>
> Half of RAM is likely to be a very bad setting for any work load.
> It will tend to result in the highest possible number of pages
> duplicated in
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Rodrigo Barboza wrote:
>
>> So setting this as half of ram, as suggested in postgres tuning
>> webpage should be safe?
>
> Half of RAM is likely to be a very bad setting for any work load.
> It will tend to result in the highest possible nu
Rodrigo Barboza wrote:
> So setting this as half of ram, as suggested in postgres tuning
> webpage should be safe?
Half of RAM is likely to be a very bad setting for any work load.
It will tend to result in the highest possible number of pages
duplicated in PostgreSQL and OS caches, reducing th
2013/3/18 Rodrigo Barboza :
> So setting this as half of ram, as suggested in postgres tuning webpage
> should be safe?
> It says it is a conservative value...
depends how much memory is used as cache ??
it can be a shared_buffers + file system cache
Regards
Pavel Stehule
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 18,
So setting this as half of ram, as suggested in postgres tuning webpage
should be safe?
It says it is a conservative value...
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2013/3/18 Pavel Stehule :
> > Hello
> >
> > 2013/3/18 Rodrigo Barboza :
> >> Hi guys, I am worried about the effec
2013/3/18 Pavel Stehule :
> Hello
>
> 2013/3/18 Rodrigo Barboza :
>> Hi guys, I am worried about the effective_cache_size.
>> I run a 32-bits postgres installation on a machine with 64 bits kernel.
>> Should I limit effective_cache_size to a maximum of 2.5gb?
>
> sure and probably little bit less
Ok, now I'm lost, who is right about the limit? Rob or Pavel?
Rob, I know it should be a 64 bit, and it will be soon, but there are good
reasons for this scenario and it's ok for now.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello
>
> 2013/3/18 Rodrigo Barboza :
> > Hi guys, I am
Hello
2013/3/18 Rodrigo Barboza :
> Hi guys, I am worried about the effective_cache_size.
> I run a 32-bits postgres installation on a machine with 64 bits kernel.
> Should I limit effective_cache_size to a maximum of 2.5gb?
sure and probably little bit less
Regards
Pavel
--
Sent via pgsql-p
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Rodrigo Barboza
wrote:
> Hi guys, I am worried about the effective_cache_size.
> I run a 32-bits postgres installation on a machine with 64 bits kernel.
> Should I limit effective_cache_size to a maximum of 2.5gb?
That variables refers to fs cache, so 32 bit pg s
Hi guys, I am worried about the effective_cache_size.
I run a 32-bits postgres installation on a machine with 64 bits kernel.
Should I limit effective_cache_size to a maximum of 2.5gb?
11 matches
Mail list logo
