Re: [doc fix] Correct calculation of vm.nr_hugepages - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [doc fix] Correct calculation of vm.nr_hugepages
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobDRXzLJ_u4pYD4UK=rYjUb_B4brO-5zPRO3fYX8duVNg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [doc fix] Correct calculation of vm.nr_hugepages  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
Responses Re: [doc fix] Correct calculation of vm.nr_hugepages
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:28 PM, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 03:14:57PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 9:43 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
>> <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> > Thanks, I'd like to take this.
>>
>> Why are these values so large?  The example in the documentation shows
>> 6490428 kB, and in my test I got 8733888 kB.  But 8733888 kB = 8.3 TB!
>>  8.3 GB would make sense, but 8.3 TB does not.
>
> pryzbyj@pryzbyj:~$ units -t -v 8733888kB GiB
>         8733888kB = 8.1340671 GiB

Sigh.  It would be nice if I were less stupid.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Possible performance regression in version 10.1 with pgbenchread-write tests.
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Avoid valgrind complaint about write() of uninitalized bytes.