All, So, I did an informal survey last night a SFPUG, among about 30 PostgreSQL DBAs and developers. While hardly a scientific sample, it's a data point on what we're looking at for servers.
Out of the 30, 6 had one or more production instances of PostgreSQL running on machines or VMs with less than 1GB of RAM. Out of those 5 had already edited their PostgreSQL.conf extensively. Perhaps more importantly, for four out of the 6, the low-memory Postgres instance(s) was an older version (8.2 to 9.0) which they did not expect to upgrade. Also, note that a couple of the 6 were consultants, so they were speaking for dozens of customer servers. As a second data point, Christophe and I did a quick survey of the database of server information on our clients, which include a bunch of cloud-hosted web companies. We found two PostgreSQL VMs which did not have 1GB or more RAM, out of a few hundred. Now, obviously, there's some significant sample bias in the above, but I think it gives support to the assertion that we shouldn't really be worrying about PostgresQL running well out-of-the-box on machines with < 1GB of RAM. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
