Re: Low Budget Performance, Part 2

From: Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Laurette Cisneros <laurette(at)nextbus(dot)com>
Cc: Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>, PgSQL Performance ML <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Low Budget Performance, Part 2
Date: 2002-11-30 19:47:45
Message-ID: 3DE915E1.70689A1B@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Laurette Cisneros wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Speaking of which, what is the recommended optimum setting for
> memory buffers?

Hi Laurette,

It depends on how much memory you have, how big your database is, the
types of queries, expected number of clients, etc.

It's just that the default settings commonly cause non-optimal
performance and massive CPU utilisation, so I was wondering.

:-)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


> Thanks,
>
> L.
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Justin Clift wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm..... Eric, have you tuned PostgreSQL's memory buffers at all?
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > Regards and best wishes,
> >
> > Justin Clift
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Laurette Cisneros
> The Database Group
> (510) 420-3137
> NextBus Information Systems, Inc.
> www.nextbus.com
> ----------------------------------
> My other vehicle is my imagination.
> - bumper sticker

--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message ir. F.T.M. van Vugt bc. 2002-12-02 15:45:55 v7.2.3 versus v7.3 -> huge performance penalty for JOIN with UNION
Previous Message Laurette Cisneros 2002-11-30 16:40:04 Re: Low Budget Performance, Part 2