Hello,
I followed this advice for picking a good effective_cache_size value
(below) from Scott Marlowe, and run into a bit of trouble:
I looked at the `top' output and saw "721380k cached".
So I calculated the effective cache size using Scott's formula:
721380/8 = 90172
Then I changed my effective_cache size from the previous 10000 to
90172:
effective_cache_size = 90172 # typically 8KB each
I restarted PG, and thought I'd see some performance improvements, but
I actually saw degradation in performance. All of a sudden a query
that took a second started taking a few seconds, and consumed more CPU
than before.
Can anyone explain this drop in performance and increase in CPU usage
and tell me what I did wrong?
I also noticed that the "721380k cached" number in top dropped to about
300000k (about a half). Maybe that was simply due to PG restart? If
so, does that indicate the kernel had about 400,000K worth of PG data
cached?
Thanks,
Otis
--- Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com> wrote:
> Effective cache size just tells the query planner about how much
> memory
> the OS is using to cache your dataset.
>
> Bring the machine up, run lots of queries, and check the cache and
> buffers with top, and there's your amount. divide by 8k to get the
> setting for effective cache size.
