Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Hi Hillary, I'd suggest around 1000 to 2000 shared buffers and bump your max connections to at least 64. Make sure you're kernel allowed enough shared memory for the above (2000 * 8k = 16MB) Chris - Original Message - From: "Hilary Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Se

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread Manfred Koizar
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 15:02:21 +0200, "Michael Mattox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I have 1.5 gigs of RAM on my >server but I'm also running a few other java programs that take up probably >500 megs total of memory, leaving me 1gig for Postgres. Should I set my >shared buffers to be 25% of 1gig? Tha

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread scott.marlowe
> > -Original Message- > > > From: scott.marlowe [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: 01 July 2003 02:56 > > > To: Michael Mattox > > > Cc: Hilary Forbes; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question &g

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread scott.marlowe
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Michael Mattox wrote: > My understanding is to use as much effect cache as possible, so figure out > how much ram you need for your other applications & OS and then give the > rest to postgres as effective cache. > > What I learned to day is the shared_buffers 25% of RAM guide

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread Michael Mattox
P:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 01 July 2003 02:56 > > To: Michael Mattox > > Cc: Hilary Forbes; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject:Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question > > > > 8192 is only 64 megs of RAM, not much, but a good number. Keep in mind > > that the

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread scott.marlowe
8192 is only 64 megs of RAM, not much, but a good number. Keep in mind that the kernel tends to be better at buffering huge amounts of disk, while postgresql is better left to use buffers that are large enough for the current working set (i.e. not your whole database, just the largest amount o

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread Michael Mattox
> yes, I'd say start with about 25% of RAM, then adjust from there. If 25% > takes you over your SHMMAX then start at your SHMMAX. You're the first person I've seen to suggest that many buffers. I've read that too many can slow down performance. I have 1.5 gigs of RAM on my server but I'm also r

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread Robert Treat
On Tue, 2003-07-01 at 08:10, Hilary Forbes wrote: > I'm just trying to improve performance on version 7 before doing some tests and hopefully upgrading to 7.3. > > At the moment we have > B=64 (no of shared buffers) > N=32 (no of connections) > in postmaster.opt which I take it is the equivalen

Re: [PERFORM] Version 7 question

2003-07-01 Thread Michael Mattox
I have my shared buffers at 8192 and my effective cache at 64000 (which is 500 megs). Depends a lot on how much RAM you have. I have 1.5 gigs and I've been asking my boss for another 512megs for over a month now. I have no idea if my buffers are too high/low. Michael > -Original Message---