I'm hoping that someone on the list can help me sort out
what I hope I'm doing wrong. Our group seems to be devoting
a lot of time and heartache to running dbmail for our user
base. Granted a lot seems to be database related.
So if there is anyone on the list that is using dbmail 2.0
with Postgr
> So if there is anyone on the list that is using dbmail 2.0
> with PostgreSQL (8.x) with 5k+ users, and a data set of around
> 20G would you contact me off list if you like.
>
We have around that for dataset/userbase, but are using dbmail 1.2.
I'll answer your questions anyway.
First off, we're r
I don't think there is any need to take this off list, I think there are
lot of people who would like to hear this discussion. Anyway I don't
run a dbmail site with that much load, however I to have a fair amount
of experience running PostgreSQL.
1) Never vacuum FULL: If you are vacuuming oft
Very interesting, then I'll probe some more...
Our database system is on a Dual 3GHz Hyperthreaded Compaq
G3 (P4 Xeon) system with 1GB of RAM with Ultra320 drives
configured in a SCSI RAID 0+1 (4 36G drives, 2 stripe sets, mirrored)
I have set my shared memory space at 512M, I would like to
go to
Hello,
The postgres setup I'm referring here is the same that Dave Logan
replied about earlier, fyi. We have no postgres experts on staff,
just Dave and I, and we do what we can. As of 7.4, unbounded growth
problems have gone away and with some trial and error, we've not had
any major database
FYI:
It took a while, but this time I really needed to look at an attachment ;-)
I can confirm that the problem I am seeing (text/rfc822 attachments not
being displayed) is indeed a client issue: attachments that I cannot see
in squirrelmail, I *can* see in thunderbird.
So: it is in the databas
Jesse, I'm like you, there are only two of us here and we are
learning PostgreSQL seat-of-pants style.
Wow, then I'm completely lost looking at your numbers.
I set my shmall and shmmax to 805306368, so that the DB (which
is the only thing using memory on the box) could have 800M of
shared RAM. A
Niblett, David A wrote:
Wow, then I'm completely lost looking at your numbers.
I set my shmall and shmmax to 805306368, so that the DB (which
is the only thing using memory on the box) could have 800M of
shared RAM. Am I crazy here?
PostgreSQL uses it's shared buffers for some internal ope
