Re: New server to improve performance on our large and busy DB - advice? (v2) - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: New server to improve performance on our large and busy DB - advice? (v2)
Date
Msg-id 26186.1263607520@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: New server to improve performance on our large and busy DB - advice? (v2)  (Dave Crooke <dcrooke@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Dave Crooke <dcrooke@gmail.com> writes:
> This is the second time I've heard that "PG shared buffer on Windows doesn't
> matter" ... I'd like to understand the reasoning behind that claim, and why
> it differs from other DB servers.

AFAIK we don't really understand why, but the experimental evidence is
that increasing shared_buffers to really large values doesn't help much
on Windows.  You can probably find more in the archives.

I'm not sure that this has been retested recently, so it might be
obsolete information, but it's what we've got.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Dave Crooke
Date:
Subject: Re: New server to improve performance on our large and busy DB - advice? (v2)
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: New server to improve performance on our large and busy DB - advice? (v2)