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 140809FB1FB for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:48:05 -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 96480-03 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:47:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.185]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE44E9FB1F1 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:47:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id a4so362552nfc for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:47:54 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=jTf59iaZvXt9Oa9AAGMoLAka9BrEEvh0njGNT7fkWKg9RzCZtHjr1S5kWhiFciZTDX4NebnpGLpRiujQeQrckhNusX+weVF8zwf/NTsx8/qGjBvBbQLL5kcrXWx8hdmZsXotL8xjYKVnUCB+qAtH1264rRUVs2X7zn3fXyJEBXg= Received: by 10.49.10.3 with SMTP id n3mr1739050nfi; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.158.10 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:47:54 -0600 From: "Carl Youngblood" To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Beginner optimization questions, esp. regarding Tsearch2 In-Reply-To: <20060815150529.GO27928@pervasive.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44DAFB2B.4070307@archonet.com> <20060815150529.GO27928@pervasive.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: ce1c22cfba6dc955 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.199 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200608/234 X-Sequence-Number: 20419 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. 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.