Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 16:59:57 -0400
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: Tom Wilcox <hungrytom@googlemail.com>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: requested shared memory size overflows size_t
Message-ID: <20100602205957.GN21875@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: <4C063967.4070705@gmail.com>
	<4C067E510200002500031DC2@gw.wicourts.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/cuYh6hu33vRhXGi"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4C067E510200002500031DC2@gw.wicourts.gov>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)


--/cuYh6hu33vRhXGi
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Kevin Grittner (Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov) wrote:
> Tom Wilcox <hungrytom@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Is it possible to get postgres to make use of the available 96GB
> > RAM on a Windows 32-bit build?
> =20
> I would try setting shared_memory to somewhere between 200MB and 1GB
> and set effective_cache_size =3D 90GB or so.  The default behavior of
> Windows was to use otherwise idle RAM for disk caching, last I
> checked, anyway.

Sure, but as explained on -general already, all that RAM will only ever
get used for disk cacheing.  It won't be able to be used for sorts or
hash aggs or any other PG operations (PG would use at most
4GB-shared_buffers, or so).

	Thanks,

		Stephen

--/cuYh6hu33vRhXGi
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkwGxk0ACgkQrzgMPqB3kij9vwCfZw4ycMbW0nUfpovMp3q30+PK
RT0AnRNr1SKHxxM640A1YIx3JMb3Pr+J
=WfDz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--/cuYh6hu33vRhXGi--