Re: [PERFORM] memory question

2010-03-25 Thread Matthew Wakeling
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Campbell, Lance wrote: I have 24 Gig of memory on my server... Our server manager seems to think that I have way to much memory. He thinks that we only need 5 Gig. You organisation probably spent more money getting your server manager to investigate how much RAM you need

Re: [PERFORM] memory question

2010-03-24 Thread Dave Crooke
What Scott said ... seconded, all of it. I'm running one 500GB database on a 64-bit, 8GB VMware virtual machine, with 2 vcores, PG 8.3.9 with shared_buffers set to 2GB, and it works great. However, it's a modest workload, most of the database is archival for data mining, and the "working set" for

Re: [PERFORM] memory question

2010-03-24 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Campbell, Lance wrote: > PostgreSQL 8.4.3 > > Linux Redhat 5.0 > > Question: How much memory do I really need? The answer is "as much as needed to hold your entire database in memory and a few gig left over for sorts and backends to play in." > From my understand

[PERFORM] memory question

2010-03-24 Thread Campbell, Lance
PostgreSQL 8.4.3 Linux Redhat 5.0 Question: How much memory do I really need? >From my understanding there are two primary strategies for setting up PostgreSQL in relationship to memory: 1) Rely on Linux to cache the files. In this approach you set the shared_buffers to a relativ

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-30 Thread Jonathan Gardner
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 27 June 2003 12:44, scott.marlowe wrote: > This is actually normal. Look at the amount cached: 6257620K. That's > 6.2Gig of cache. Linux is using only 6517776k - 6257620k of memory, the > rest is just acting as kernel cache. If anything t

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-29 Thread Thomas Swan
Arjen van der Meijden wrote: I've heard that too, but it doesn't seem to make much sense to me. If you get to the point where your machine is _needing_ 2GB of swap then something has gone horribly wrong (or you just need more RAM in the machine) and it will just crawl until the kernel kills o

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread scott.marlowe
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Matthew Hixson wrote: > On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 01:17 PM, Jord Tanner wrote: > > I've heard anecdotally that Linux has troubles if the swap space is > > less > > than the RAM size. I note that you have 6G of RAM, but only 2G of swap. > > I've heard that too, but it does

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Arjen van der Meijden
> I've heard that too, but it doesn't seem to make much sense > to me. If > you get to the point where your machine is _needing_ 2GB of swap then > something has gone horribly wrong (or you just need more RAM in the > machine) and it will just crawl until the kernel kills off whatever > proce

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Arjen van der Meijden
> The "used" figure in Top doesn't really tell you anything, > since it includes > the kernel buffer which tries to take up all available > memory. If you > actually look at the list of processes, I think you'll find > that you're only > using 1-2% of memory for applications. > > I'm not su

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Matthew Hixson
On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 01:17 PM, Jord Tanner wrote: On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 12:09, Patrick Hatcher wrote: I have 6gig Ram box. I've set my shmmax to 307200. The database starts up fine without any issues. As soon as a query is ran or a FTP process to the server is done, the used me

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Jord Tanner
On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 12:09, Patrick Hatcher wrote: > I have 6gig Ram box. I've set my shmmax to 307200. The database > starts up fine without any issues. As soon as a query is ran > or a FTP process to the server is done, the used memory shoots up and > appears to never be released. I

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Patrick Hatcher
rlowe "To: Patrick Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> @ihs.com> Subject: Re: [PERFO

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Patrick Hatcher
>cc: Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Memory question 06/27/2003

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Josh Berkus
Patrick, > Sorry for posting an obvious Linux question, but have any of you > encountered this and how have you fixed it. > I have 6gig Ram box. I've set my shmmax to 307200. The database > starts up fine without any issues. As soon as a query is ran > or a FTP process to the server is do

Re: [PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread scott.marlowe
This is actually normal. Look at the amount cached: 6257620K. That's 6.2Gig of cache. Linux is using only 6517776k - 6257620k of memory, the rest is just acting as kernel cache. If anything tries to allocate a bit of memory, linux will flush enough cache to give the memory to the applicatio

[PERFORM] Memory question

2003-06-27 Thread Patrick Hatcher
Sorry for posting an obvious Linux question, but have any of you encountered this and how have you fixed it. I have 6gig Ram box. I've set my shmmax to 307200. The database starts up fine without any issues. As soon as a query is ran or a FTP process to the server is done, the used memory