X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4049FA38F for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:22:20 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 39199-03 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:22:11 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0019FA1A8 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:22:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5DMM780011047; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:22:08 -0400 (EDT) To: mischa@ca.sophos.com cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Solaris shared_buffers anomaly? In-reply-to: <448F3A6E.6080908@ca.sophos.com> References: <1150151282.14661.42.camel@tigger> <20060613000441.GI8588@kenobi.snowman.net> <20060613200810.GZ34196@pervasive.com> <448F3A6E.6080908@ca.sophos.com> Comments: In-reply-to Mischa Sandberg message dated "Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:21:34 -0700" Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:22:07 -0400 Message-ID: <11046.1150237327@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200606/218 X-Sequence-Number: 19575 Mischa Sandberg writes: > vmstat showed that it was swapping like crazy. > Dropped shared_buffers back down again. > Swapping stopped. Does Solaris have any call that allows locking a shmem segment in RAM? regards, tom lane