Re: Small OS ports & Handheld devices
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Small OS ports & Handheld devices |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 17706.1083279413@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Small OS ports & Handheld devices (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > ... I'm looking into PostgreSQL on small > handheld devices. Clearly these have limited memory and little "disk" > capability... > Are there some ports available to various devices? I don't know of any supported ports. > What is the lowest memory footprint PostgreSQL has achieved? This depends entirely on your postgresql.conf settings and how complex the queries you want to process are. I would think you could get it down to maybe 4 or so meg if you have bottom-of-the-barrel requirements. Performance in this configuration not guaranteed ;-) > How little disk space has anyone achieved? > Is that an available port, or just a set of configure options? IIRC, configuring the WAL segment size is a pg_config_manual.h setting in CVS tip, but in extant releases you'd have to dig into the xlog code to adjust it. > Q: Does PostgreSQL write repeatedly even when there is a no overt SQL > write activity? Given a SELECT-only query load, I'd expect PG to reach a state of zero new writes fairly quickly (at the latest, after a vacuum and checkpoint have occurred). The real problem is that any single update operation will generate quite a number of disk writes, the more so the smaller your shared_buffers setting :-(. It's not at all optimized to minimize writes in a low-but-not-zero-update-traffic situation. So you'd likely be facing some issues with FLASH lifetime. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: