X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D38223A3BF2 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:31:37 +0100 (BST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 71412-03 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:31:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from k2.nmr.varianinc.com (host-70-89.varianinc.com [4.22.70.89]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05C8B3A3B80 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:31:25 +0100 (BST) Received: from varianinc.com (gandalf [10.190.213.233]) by k2.nmr.varianinc.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA02594 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:31:22 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <417D629C.7000805@varianinc.com> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:31:24 -0600 From: Glenn Sullivan Organization: Chemagnetics/Varian NMR User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020920 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-general Subject: shared buffers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200410/1192 X-Sequence-Number: 67715 Hi, In the 7.4.5 version, the code is now trying to use a much larger value for shared_buffers. I can certainly set this to a lower number with the -B option. However, my guestion is: What is the performance issue with setting shared_buffers to something like 45? In doing some timing on my system, I cannot tell any difference with 45 versus 1000. Perhaps I am looking at the wrong performance criteria. Thanks, Glenn