Hi Craig,
Thank you very much for your response.
It really covered a great point.
Thank you,
Kishore.
On 10/23/05, Craig A. James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We are facing a* critical situation because of the performance of the> **database** .* Even a basic query like select count(*) from
Hi Gunderson,
Can I set the effective_cache_size to 20?
Yes, that should work fine.
Do you mean that I can set the effective_cache_size to 1.5 GB out of 2GB Memory that I have in the current system?
Can I set the sort_memory to 3072? We need to generate reports which make heavy use of g
Kishore B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Even a basic query like select count(*) from bigger_table is
> taking about 4 minutes to return.
You do realize that "select count(*)" requires a full table scan in
Postgres? It's never going to be fast.
If that's not where your performance problem really
[please send replies to the list, not to me directly]
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 03:19:39AM +0530, Kishore B wrote:
> *You definitely want to upgrade this if you can.
>
> > Memory : 2 GB
> *
> We can move upto 12 GB if need to be.
I was referring to your PostgreSQL version, not your RAM. More RAM
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 02:45:25AM +0530, Kishore B wrote:
> Database *:* Postgresql 7.3
You definitely want to upgrade this if you can.
> Memory : 2 GB
For 2GB of RAM, your effective_cache_size (10) is a bit low (try doubling
it), and sort_mem (2048) is probably a bit too low as well.
/* S
