Re: [GENERAL] Up to date conventional wisdom re max shared_buffer size? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Scott Marlowe
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Up to date conventional wisdom re max shared_buffer size?
Date
Msg-id CAOR=d=0ASFyG1XfdrARQiUWbwzT9egmcWa=X4+-j=c=OTAsGoA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [GENERAL] Up to date conventional wisdom re max shared_buffer size?  (Jerry Sievers <gsievers19@comcast.net>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Up to date conventional wisdom re max shared_buffer size?
List pgsql-general
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Jerry Sievers <gsievers19@comcast.net> wrote:
> Briefly, just curious if legacy max values for shared_buffers have
> scaled up since 8G was like 25% of RAM?
>
> Pg 9.3 on monster 2T/192 CPU Xenial thrashing
>
> Upgrade pending but we recently started having $interesting performance
> issues at times looking like I/O slowness and other times apparently
> causing CPU spins.

Have you looked at things like zone reclaim mode and transparent huge
pages? Both of those can cause odd problems. Also it's usually a good
idea to turn off swap as the linux kernel, presented with lots of ram
and a small (by comparison) swap file sometimes makes bad life choices
and starts using swap for things like storing currently unused shared
buffers or something.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Any known issues Pg 9.3 on Ubuntu Xenial kernel 4.4.0?
Next
From: Ron Johnson
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Up to date conventional wisdom re max shared_buffersize?