Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3E365018A for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:10:09 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 74367-01 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:10:00 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from bb-email.net (bb-email.net [128.121.78.132]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167D464FEBB for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:09:59 -0400 (AST) Received: from bb001077 (hammertaprg.hammertap.com [67.50.128.40]) (authenticated bits=0) by bb-email.net (8.13.6.20060614/8.13.6) with ESMTP id mAQM9w45027124 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:09:58 -0700 (MST) From: "Ryan Hansen" To: Subject: Memory Allocation Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:09:55 -0700 Message-ID: <011101c95013$b6fca0a0$24f5e1e0$@hansen@brightbuilders.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0112_01C94FD9.0A9DC8A0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AclQE7aF+6Fp0CtJTcOBvOAXcEpAHg== Content-Language: en-us X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (bb-email.net [128.121.78.132]); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:09:58 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.212 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.211 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200811/271 X-Sequence-Number: 32002 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0112_01C94FD9.0A9DC8A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hey all, This may be more of a Linux question than a PG question, but I'm wondering if any of you have successfully allocated more than 8 GB of memory to PG before. I have a fairly robust server running Ubuntu Hardy Heron, 24 GB of memory, and I've tried to commit half the memory to PG's shared buffer, but it seems to fail. I'm setting the kernel shared memory accordingly using sysctl, which seems to work fine, but when I set the shared buffer in PG and restart the service, it fails if it's above about 8 GB. I actually have it currently set at 6 GB. I don't have the exact failure message handy, but I can certainly get it if that helps. Mostly I'm just looking to know if there's any general reason why it would fail, some inherent kernel or db limitation that I'm unaware of. If it matters, this DB is going to be hosting and processing hundreds of GB and eventually TB of data, it's a heavy read-write system, not transactional processing, just a lot of data file parsing (python/bash) and bulk loading. Obviously the disks get hit pretty hard already, so I want to make the most of the large amount of available memory wherever possible. So I'm trying to tune in that direction. Any info is appreciated. Thanks! ------=_NextPart_000_0112_01C94FD9.0A9DC8A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hey all,

This may be more of a Linux question than a PG = question, but I’m wondering if any of you have successfully allocated more than = 8 GB of memory to PG before.

I have a fairly robust server running Ubuntu Hardy = Heron, 24 GB of memory, and I’ve tried to commit half the memory to = PG’s shared buffer, but it seems to fail. I’m setting the kernel = shared memory accordingly using sysctl, which seems to work fine, but when I = set the shared buffer in PG and restart the service, it fails if it’s = above about 8 GB. I actually have it currently set at 6 GB.

I don’t have the exact failure message handy, = but I can certainly get it if that helps. Mostly I’m just looking = to know if there’s any general reason why it would fail, some inherent = kernel or db limitation that I’m unaware of.

If it matters, this DB is going to be hosting and = processing hundreds of GB and eventually TB of data, it’s a heavy read-write = system, not transactional processing, just a lot of data file parsing = (python/bash) and bulk loading. Obviously the disks get hit pretty hard already, so = I want to make the most of the large amount of available memory wherever = possible. So I’m trying to tune in that direction.

Any info is appreciated.

Thanks!

------=_NextPart_000_0112_01C94FD9.0A9DC8A0--