> The most important thing seems to be to increase shared_buffers. On my
> RH7.3 machine here, Linux is configured with shmmax = 32MB which allows me
> a value of just under 4000 for shared_buffers (3900 works, 3950 doesn't).
> If your selects return large amounts of data, you'll probably also need to
> increase sort_mem (I use a value of 1024 so a query would have to return
> more that 1MB of data before the sort (assuming there is a order by clause
> to cause a sort) starts paging stuff out disk.
> >
> > I found that Red Hat Database 2.1 comes with PostgreSQL installed.
> > However, as far as I can tell it comes with postgreSQL 7.2 and it
> > requires Red Hat 8.0 or Red Hat Advanced Server which is based on Red
> > Hat 7.2. Would I be better off installing Red Hat 9.0 and PostgreSQL 7.3
> > and try to performance tune the installation myself, or should I buy Red
> > Hat Advanced Server and install Red Hat Database 2.1? (Let's say money
> > is no object)
>
>
> Alternatively, you simply compile 7.3.3 from source. I've upgraded most my
> machines that way.
>
Unfortunatelly, compiling from source is not really an option for us. We use
RPMs only to ease the installation and upgrade process. We have over a
hundred servers to maintaine and having to compile and recompile software
everytime a new release comes out would be waaaaay too much work.
> >
> > So, does anyone here have any experience using RH AS and DB 2.1?
>
> Are RH still selling DB 2.1? I can't find it listed on their web site.
> --
Yes, it's available for free download. The documentation is here:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/database/. I'd welcome your oppinions on
this product.
Thank you for your comments.
Balazs
