X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E143A9FB1F1 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:21:58 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10353-06 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 19:21:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D6D9F9B01 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:21:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5C9CD56441; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:21:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:21:46 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:21:46 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Carl Youngblood Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Beginner optimization questions, esp. regarding Tsearch2 Message-ID: <20060815192145.GI21363@pervasive.com> References: <44DAFB2B.4070307@archonet.com> <20060815150529.GO27928@pervasive.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE-p4 amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Hashcash: 1:20:060815:carl@youngbloods.org::HHwHoYpEHX8YIhta:00000000000000000 0000000000000000000000008asE X-Hashcash: 1:20:060815:pgsql-performance@postgresql.org::rqA3sKbOrzAXfRXh:00000 0000000000000000000000001Lql X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200608/241 X-Sequence-Number: 20426 On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 12:47:54PM -0600, Carl Youngblood wrote: > I tried setting it to 2GB and postgres wouldn't start. Didn't > investigate in much greater detail as to why it wouldn't start, but > after switching it back to 1GB it started fine. Most likely because you didn't set the kernel's shared memory settings high enough. To answer you other question: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2006-08/msg00095.php > On 8/15/06, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > >See the recent thread about how old rules of thumb for shared_buffers > >are now completely bunk. With 4G of memory, setting shared_buffers to 2G > >could easily be reasonable. The OP really needs to test several > >different values with their actual workload and see what works best. > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461