Hi Grag,
thank you, I realized the problem. I treated these values as per server
values not per connection.
It's now working with 20 or more concurrent connections well.
bye,
-- Csaba
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Greg Stark
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 6:25 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Insufficient memory for this operation.
Együd Csaba (Freemail) <csegyud@freemail.hu> writes:
> shared_buffers = 20000 # min 16, at least max_connections*2, 8KB
each
You can lower this to 10,000 or even lower.
> max_connections = 100
> work_mem = 16384 # min 64, size in KB
That's 16M per connection with a maximum of 100 connections. So that's up to
1.6G that postgres has been told it can grab. It's unlikely it would grab it
all at once though unless lots of connections are running queries with big
sorts.
--
greg
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.805 / Virus Database: 547 - Release Date: 2004.12.03.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.805 / Virus Database: 547 - Release Date: 2004.12.03.
