Re: Issue with SHMALL parameter - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From data tanger
Subject Re: Issue with SHMALL parameter
Date
Msg-id DUB103-W42B97610A1D80A23A947A6A1940@phx.gbl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Issue with SHMALL parameter  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-docs
Thank you for your answer. I think the value of shmall I have is very common cause I've seen it many times in other servers.
Do you think there maybe a link between the request size of postgres and the swap size?

Here is the output of free -m

free -m
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:          7867       1860       6007          0          5        595
-/+ buffers/cache:       1258       6609
Swap:         1023          2       1021

Regards,

> From: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
> To: datatanger@hotmail.fr
> CC: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [DOCS] Issue with SHMALL parameter
> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:07:46 -0400
>
> data tanger <datatanger@hotmail.fr> writes:
> > Here are the shmall and the shmax params of my server:
> > #cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax 68719476736
> > #cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmall 4294967296
>
> SHMALL is measured in pages not bytes on Linux. I wonder if that value
> is too large and is causing an internal integer overflow in the kernel.
>
> regards, tom lane

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Issue with SHMALL parameter
Next
From: Shigeru HANADA
Date:
Subject: Different wording in file_fdw document