X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [64.117.224.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D1F9D1B4FF for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:13:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [64.117.224.130]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 03829-09 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:12:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from smtp.pspl.co.in (unknown [202.54.11.65]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC73D1B514 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:12:46 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from root@localhost) by smtp.pspl.co.in (8.12.9/8.12.9) id h9DEJ6AP013610 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:49:06 +0530 Received: from daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in (daithan.intranet.pspl.co.in [192.168.7.161]) (authenticated bits=0) by persistent.co.in (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h9DEJ5wc013583; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:49:05 +0530 From: Shridhar Daithankar To: Vivek Khera , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: go for a script! / ex: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:44:55 +0530 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <007901c38f2b$0b585590$2802a8c0@webbased10> <20031011092308.GA39942@perrin.nxad.com> <16266.45299.517752.465494@yertle.int.kciLink.com> In-Reply-To: <16266.45299.517752.465494@yertle.int.kciLink.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200310131944.55273.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200310/423 X-Sequence-Number: 4171 On Monday 13 October 2003 19:34, Vivek Khera wrote: > >>>>> "SC" == Sean Chittenden writes: > >> > >> echo "effective_cache_size = $((`sysctl -n vfs.hibufspace` / 8192))" > >> > >> I've used it for my dedicated servers. Is this calculation correct? > > SC> Yes, or it's real close at least. vfs.hibufspace is the amount of > SC> kernel space that's used for caching IO operations (minus the > > I'm just curious if anyone has a tip to increase the amount of memory > FreeBSD will use for the cache? It appears to me that even on my 2Gb > box, lots of memory is 'free' that could be used for the cache > (bumping up shared buffers is another option...) yet the disk is being > highly utilized according to systat. Is this of any help?..reverse video sucks though.. especially spec'ed person like me.. http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/performance/2003-07/0073.html Shridhar