On 17 Jan 2003 at 12:33, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> >>> shared_buffers = 131072
> >>
> >> Yipes! Try about a tenth that much. Or less.
>
> > Why? He has 4GB RAM on the machine.
>
> I think a gig of shared buffers is overkill no matter what.
>
> One reason not to crank up shared_buffers "just because you can" is that
> there are operations (such as CHECKPOINT) that have to scan through all
> the buffers, linearly. I don't *think* any of these are in
> performance-critical paths, but nonetheless you're wasting CPU. I trust
Assuming that one knows what he/she is doing, would it help in such cases i.e.
the linear search thing, to bump up page size to day 16K/32K?
and that is also the only way to make postgresql use more than couple of gigs
of RAM, isn't it?
Bye
Shridhar
--
Arithmetic: An obscure art no longer practiced in the world's developed
countries.
