On 02/26/2004-11:16AM, Dror Matalon wrote:
> >
> > effective_cache_size changes no cache settings for postgresql, it simply
> > acts as a hint to the planner on about how much of the dataset your OS /
> > Kernel / Disk cache can hold.
>
> I understand that. The question is why have the OS, in t
Jonathan M. Gardner wrote:
You can view my summary at
http://jonathangardner.net/PostgreSQL/materialized_views/matviews.html
Comments and suggestions are definitely welcome.
Fantastic, I was planning on a bit of materialized view investigations
myself
when time permits, I'm pleased to see you've
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:28:07 -0500, John Allgood wrote:
> I am planning on separating the OS, Data, WAL on to separate drives
> which will be mirrored.
Have you considered RAID-10 in stead of RAID-1?
> I am looking for input on setting kernel
> parameters, and Postgres server runtime param
I have a query that I think should run faster. The machine is P2/400
with enough ram (384MB), but still, maybe the query could be tuned up.
postgresql.conf is stock with these values changed:
fsync=false
shared_buffers = 5000
sort_mem = 8192
vacuum_mem = 16384
This is a development machine, the p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 01:48 pm, Robert Treat wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 12:11, Richard Huxton wrote:
> > On Tuesday 24 February 2004 16:11, Jonathan M. Gardner wrote:
> > > I've written a summary of my findings on implementing and using
> > >
can anyone tell me what the best way to compile postgresql 7.4.1 on
Solaris 9 (UltraSparcIII) is? I have latest gmake and gcc installed. I
was going to use CFLAGS="-O2 -fast -mcpu=ultrasparc" based on snippets
I've read about the place. Would using -O3 be an improvement?
thanks
--
Richard Huxton wrote:
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 16:11, Jonathan M. Gardner wrote:
I've written a summary of my findings on implementing and using
materialized views in PostgreSQL. I've already deployed eagerly updating
materialized views on several views in a production environment for a
company
On 02/26/2004-01:58PM, Dror Matalon wrote:
>
> Sigh.
>
Sigh, right back at you.
> which brings me back to my question why not make Freebsd use more of its
> memory for disk caching and then tell postgres about it.
>
Because you can't. It already uses ALL RAM that isn't in use for
something
Rob
Sir - I have to congratulate you on having the most coherently summarised and
yet complex list query I have ever seen.
I fear that I will be learning from this problem rather than helping, but one
thing did puzzle me - you've set your random_page_cost to 0.5? I'm not sure
this is sensible
Hi,
There alot here, so skip to the middle from my WAL settings if you like.
I'm currently investigating the performance on a large database which
consumes email designated as SPAM for the perusal of customers wishing
to check. This incorporates a number of subprocesses - several delivery
daem
On Friday 27 February 2004 21:03, scott.marlowe wrote:
> Linux doesn't work with a pre-assigned size for kernel cache.
> It just grabs whatever's free, minus a few megs for easily launching new
> programs or allocating more memory for programs, and uses that for the
> cache. then, when a request c
11 matches
Mail list logo
