From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: 2GB or not 2GB
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 16:59:26 -0700
Message-ID: <200805281659.26945.josh@agliodbs.com> (raw)
Folks,
Subsequent to my presentation of the new annotated.conf at pgCon last week,
there's been some argument about the utility of certain memory settings
above 2GB. I'd like to hash those out on this list so that we can make
some concrete recomendations to users.
shared_buffers: according to witnesses, Greg Smith presented at East that
based on PostgreSQL's buffer algorithms, buffers above 2GB would not
really receive significant use. However, Jignesh Shah has tested that on
workloads with large numbers of connections, allocating up to 10GB
improves performance.
sort_mem: My tests with 8.2 and DBT3 seemed to show that, due to
limitations of our tape sort algorithm, allocating over 2GB for a single
sort had no benefit. However, Magnus and others have claimed otherwise.
Has this improved in 8.3?
So, can we have some test evidence here? And workload descriptions?
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: 2GB or not 2GB
In-Reply-To: <200805281659.26945.josh@agliodbs.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox