Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: shared_buffers > 284263 on OS X - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: shared_buffers > 284263 on OS X
Date
Msg-id 20061126232523.GD39519@nasby.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: shared_buffers > 284263 on OS X  (Brian Wipf <brian@clickspace.com>)
Responses Re: shared_buffers > 284263 on OS X  (Brendan Duddridge <brendan@clickspace.com>)
Re: shared_buffers > 284263 on OS X  (Guido Neitzer <lists@event-s.net>)
Re: shared_buffers > 284263 on OS X  (Brian Wipf <brian@clickspace.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Tree view 
On Sat, Nov 18, 2006 at 08:13:26PM -0700, Brian Wipf wrote:
> It certainly is unfortunate if Guido's right and this is an upper
> limit for OS X. The performance benefit of having high shared_buffers
> on our mostly read database is remarkable.

Got any data about that you can share? People have been wondering about
cases where drastically increasing shared_buffers makes a difference.
--
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: When to vacuum a table?
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: availability of SATA vendors