Re: PG 8.3 and large shared buffer settings
От | Dan Sugalski |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PG 8.3 and large shared buffer settings |
Дата | |
Msg-id | a06240803c6e23fd57b77@[172.16.5.2] обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PG 8.3 and large shared buffer settings (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: PG 8.3 and large shared buffer settings
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
At 12:36 AM -0400 9/25/09, Tom Lane wrote: >Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes: >> Is there any practical limit to the number of shared buffers PG 8.3.7 >> can handle before more becomes counter-productive? > >Probably, but I've not heard any definitive measurements showing an >upper limit. The traditional wisdom of limiting it to 1G or so dates >from before the last rounds of revisions to the bufmgr logic. Excellent. > > My production DB's around 200G, and the box hosting it has 192G of >> memory on it, running a 64 bit AIX build of 8.3.7. > >Yowza. You might be able to do measurements that no one has done >before. Let us know what you find out. :) It's a machine of non-trivial size, to be sure. I'll give the buffer setting a good bump and see how it goes. I may be able to take one of the slony replicas off-line the next holiday and run some performance tests, but that won't be for a while. >BTW, does AIX have any provision for locking shared memory into RAM? >One of the gotchas for large shared memory has always been the risk >that the kernel would decide to swap some of it out. I'll have to go check, but I think it does. This box hasn't actually hit swap since it started -- a good chunk of that RAM is used as semi-permanent disk cache but unfortunately the regular day-to-day use of this box (they won't let me have it as a dedicated DB-only machine. Go figure :) doing other stuff the cache tends to turn over pretty quickly. -- Dan --------------------------------------it's like this------------------- Dan Sugalski even samurai dan@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: