Aah ok :)
I've set my values now as follow (2GB RAM):
SHMMAX=`cat /proc/meminfo | grep MemTotal | cut -d: -f 2 | awk '{print
$1*1024/3}'`
echo kernel.shmmax=${SHMMAX} /etc/sysctl.conf
SHMALL=`expr ${SHMALL} / 4096 \* \( 4096 / 16 \)`
echo kernel.shmall=${SHMALL} /etc/sysctl.conf
sysctl.conf:
ok i set it to 524288. ;)
Am Freitag, den 03.06.2005, 21:10 +1200 schrieb Mark Kirkwood:
Martin Fandel wrote:
Aah ok :)
I've set my values now as follow (2GB RAM):
SHMMAX=`cat /proc/meminfo | grep MemTotal | cut -d: -f 2 | awk '{print
$1*1024/3}'`
echo kernel.shmmax=${SHMMAX}
Hi,
hmmm i don't understand which are the best values for shmmax and shmall.
I've googled around but every site says something different.
I've 2GB of RAM now and set it to:
kernel.shmmax=715827882
kernel.shmall=2097152
Is that value ok for 2GB of RAM?
I've set the shared_buffers in my
Ups,
i'm sorry. i've set the following values:
postgresql.conf:
shared_buffers = 7
effective_cache_size= 1744762
work_mem= 32768
maintenance_work_mem= 262144
max_fsm_pages = 20
sysctl.conf:
I've forgotten the settings for the pgbench-tests. I use 150 clients
with 5 transactions each.
Am Donnerstag, den 02.06.2005, 15:10 +0200 schrieb Martin Fandel:
Ups,
i'm sorry. i've set the following values:
postgresql.conf:
shared_buffers = 7
effective_cache_size
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, but
to maximum
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, but
to maximum number of shared memory pages, which on a typical linux system
is
Cosimo Streppone wrote:
Mark Kirkwood ha scritto:
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, but
Sorry, I thought
Hi John,
thank you very much for the answer :). I moved the pg_xlog to another
partition and made a symlink to it. Know the database is much more
faster than before. A sample select which was finished in 68seconds
before, is now finished in 58seconds :).
I will test the other changes today also
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 07:30:37AM +0200, Cosimo Streppone wrote:
fsync = true
false
Just setting fsync=false without considering the implications is a _bad_
idea...
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
---(end of
Yes, i think also that this setting should be enabled :).
Am Mittwoch, den 01.06.2005, 11:57 +0200 schrieb Steinar H. Gunderson:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 07:30:37AM +0200, Cosimo Streppone wrote:
fsync = true
false
Just setting fsync=false without considering the
Martin Fandel wrote:
Hi @ all,
i'm trying to tune my postgresql-db but i don't know if the values are
right
set.
I use the following environment for the postgres-db:
# Hardware
cpu: 2x P4 3Ghz
ram: 1024MB DDR 266Mhz
partitions:
/dev/sda3 23G 9,6G 13G
Martin Fandel wrote:
i'm trying to tune my postgresql-db but i don't know if the values are
I use the following environment for the postgres-db:
I assumed you're running Linux here, you don't mention it.
# Hardware
cpu: 2x P4 3Ghz
ram: 1024MB DDR 266Mhz
I think 1Gb
13 matches
Mail list logo
