From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>
To: Harald Armin Massa <haraldarminmassa@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Kernel cache vs shared_buffers
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 10:41:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4646DD4E.4000301@enterprisedb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7be3f35d0705130139o218a2a38l6471d6c8aeb1c71f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00b301c79486$1c54da80$0200a8c0@saturn>
<4645CF1D.1030309@enterprisedb.com>
<7be3f35d0705130139o218a2a38l6471d6c8aeb1c71f@mail.gmail.com>
Harald Armin Massa wrote:
>> A common rule of thumb people quote here is to set shared_buffers to 1/4
>> of available RAM, and leave the rest for OS cache. That's probably a
>> good configuration to start with.
>
> And just for the record: This rule of thumb does NOT apply to
> PostgreSQL on Windows. My current rule of thumb on Windows: set
> shared_buffers to minimum * 2
> Adjust effective_cache_size to the number given as "system cache"
> within the task manager.
Why?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
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: heikki@enterprisedb.com, haraldarminmassa@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Kernel cache vs shared_buffers
In-Reply-To: <4646DD4E.4000301@enterprisedb.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