Re: Shared memory usage in PostgreSQL 9.1 - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Shared memory usage in PostgreSQL 9.1
Date
Msg-id 20111204140623.GK24234@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Shared memory usage in PostgreSQL 9.1  (Christoph Zwerschke <cito@online.de>)
Responses Re: Shared memory usage in PostgreSQL 9.1  (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
List pgsql-general
* Christoph Zwerschke (cito@online.de) wrote:
> (Btw, what negative consequences - if any - does it have if I set
> kernel.shmmax higher as necessary, like all available memory? Does
> this limit serve only as a protection against greedy applications?)

Didn't see this get answered...  The long-and-short of that there aren't
any negative consequences of having it higher, as I understand it
anyway, except the risk of greedy apps.  In some cases, shared memory
can't be swapped out, which makes it a bit more risky than 'regular'
memory getting sucked up by some app.

    Thanks,

        Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Phoenix Kiula
Date:
Subject: Re: Weird behavior: deleted row still in index?
Next
From: sfrost@snowman.net
Date:
Subject: Re: Shared memory usage in PostgreSQL 9.1