Re: PostgreSQL Performance on OpenBSD - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Martin Foster
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Performance on OpenBSD
Date
Msg-id 3EC93A08.5060203@ethereal-realms.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL Performance on OpenBSD  ("scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>)
List pgsql-general
scott.marlowe wrote:
> I'm pretty sure sort buffer is measured in k, not 8k units.  i.e.
>
> 16384 sort mem is 16 Megs.
>
> Or are you referring to something other than sort_mem?
>

It seems that you are correct.   Just took a look at the configuration
file and while shared_buffers are in 8K units, or seem to be the
sort_mem is in K units meaning that I am allocating less then expected.

   128 x 1024 / 8 = 16384 (shared_buffers)
    20 x 1024     = 20480 (sort_mem)

Are these numbers normal?   Since they start you out at considerably
higher then the default/minimum values that PostgreSQL advertises in
it's configuration file.

    Martin Foster
    Creator/Designer Ethereal Realms
    martin@ethereal-realms.org



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: google@newtopia.com (Michael Pohl)
Date:
Subject: plpgsql vs. SQL performance
Next
From: Gavin Sherry
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] An interesting document? May be in non-traditional