Re: The right SHMMAX and FILE_MAX
От | Adarsh Sharma |
---|---|
Тема | Re: The right SHMMAX and FILE_MAX |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4DBE38BB.7040106@orkash.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | The right SHMMAX and FILE_MAX (Phoenix Kiula <phoenix.kiula@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: The right SHMMAX and FILE_MAX
Re: The right SHMMAX and FILE_MAX |
Список | pgsql-performance |
I am also in need of a proper documentation that explains how to set SHMAX and SHMALL variables in Postgres. What things need to be taken in consideration before doing that ? What is the value of SHMAX & SHMALL if u have 16 GB RAM for Postgres Server ? Thanks Phoenix Kiula wrote: > Hi. I'm on a 64 Bit CentOS 5 system, quadcore processor, 8GB RAM and > tons of data storage (1 TB SATAII disks). > > The current SHMMAX and SHMMIN are (commas added for legibility) -- > > kernel.shmmax = 68,719,476,736 > kernel.shmall = 4,294,967,296 > > Now, according to my reading in the PG manual and this list, a good > recommended value for SHMMAX is > > (shared_buffers * 8192) > > My postgresql.conf settings at the moment are: > > max_connections = 300 > shared_buffers = 300MB > effective_cache_size = 2000MB > > By this calculation, shared_b * 8192 will be: > > 2,457,600,000,000 > > That's a humongous number. So either the principle for SHMMAX is > amiss, or I am reading this wrongly? > > Similarly with "fs.file_max". There are articles like this one: > http://tldp.org/LDP/solrhe/Securing-Optimizing-Linux-RH-Edition-v1.3/chap6sec72.html > > Is this relevant for PostgreSQL performance at all, or should I skip that? > > Thanks for any pointers! > >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: