Re: [ADMIN] shared_buffers and shmmax

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > [ redirecting to pgsql-docs ]
> > >
> > > Valentin Bogdanov <valiouk@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> > > >> From: dx k9 <bitsandbytes88@hotmail.com>
> > > >> I'm trying to understand what the documentation means
> > > >> by bytes per increment, what is the increment supposed to
> > > >> be bytes, MB, or Kb.
> > >
> > > > shared_buffers is in disk block size, typically 8K, at least that's what it is on Linux platforms. shmmax is
quitesimply in bytes. 
> > >
> > > The table the OP is looking at (table 17.2 in the 8.3 docs) predates
> > > the ability to specify shared_buffers in KB or MB instead of
> > > number-of-buffers.  I agree it's not entirely obvious that what it
> > > means is "multiply your setting in KB/MB by 8400/8192".  Anybody have
> > > an idea how to clarify things?
> >
> > I have updated the table title to be clearer.
>
> I don't find it any clearer ... I think the missing clue is that if you
> specify shared_buffers values in MB, you must divide the value by block
> size.

Well, the heading says "object" now so I thought it would suggest we are
talking about objects and not bytes.

> > ***************
> > *** 1119,1125 ****
> >
> >         <row>
> >          <entry>Fixed space requirements</>
> > !        <entry>770 kB</entry>
> >         </row>
> >        </tbody>
> >       </tgroup>
> > --- 1119,1125 ----
> >
> >         <row>
> >          <entry>Fixed space requirements</>
> > !        <entry>770 k</entry>
> >         </row>
> >        </tbody>
> >       </tgroup>
>
> This change is wrong, why did you do it?

The heading says "bytes" so having the "B" was unnecessary and possibly
confusing.


--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +