On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:34:24AM -0600, Carl Youngblood wrote:
> The relevant portion of my sysctl.conf file looks like this:
>
> kernel.shmall = 2097152
> kernel.shmmax = 2147483648
> kernel.shmmni = 4096
> kernel.sem = 250 32000 100 128
> fs.file-max = 65536
>
> I understood it was a good ide
The relevant portion of my sysctl.conf file looks like this:
kernel.shmall = 2097152
kernel.shmmax = 2147483648
kernel.shmmni = 4096
kernel.sem = 250 32000 100 128
fs.file-max = 65536
I understood it was a good idea to set shmmax to half of available
memory (2GB in this case). I assume that I n
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:47:54 -0600
"Carl Youngblood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tried setting it to 2GB and postgres wouldn't start. Didn't
> investigate in much greater detail as to why it wouldn't start, but
> after switching it back to 1GB it started fine.
>
> On 8/15/06, Jim C. Nasby <[E
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 12:47:54PM -0600, Carl Youngblood wrote:
> I tried setting it to 2GB and postgres wouldn't start. Didn't
> investigate in much greater detail as to why it wouldn't start, but
> after switching it back to 1GB it started fine.
Most likely because you didn't set the kernel's
By the way, can you please post a link to that thread?
On 8/15/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
See the recent thread about how old rules of thumb for shared_buffers
are now completely bunk. With 4G of memory, setting shared_buffers to 2G
could easily be reasonable. The OP really need
I tried setting it to 2GB and postgres wouldn't start. Didn't
investigate in much greater detail as to why it wouldn't start, but
after switching it back to 1GB it started fine.
On 8/15/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
See the recent thread about how old rules of thumb for shared_buf
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 10:23:55AM +0100, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Carl Youngblood wrote:
> >- I noticed that there are six different postmaster daemons running.
> >Only one of them is taking up a lot of RAM (1076m virtual and 584m
> >resident). The second one is using 181m resident while the other
Thanks a lot for the advice Richard. I will try those things out and
report back to the list.
Carl
On 8/10/06, Richard Huxton wrote:
From your figures, you're allocating about 64MB to work_mem, which is
per sort. So, a complex query could use several times that amount. If
you don't have many
Hi, Richard and Carl,
Richard Huxton wrote:
> Carl Youngblood wrote:
>> - I noticed that there are six different postmaster daemons running.
>> Only one of them is taking up a lot of RAM (1076m virtual and 584m
>> resident). The second one is using 181m resident while the others are
>> less than
Carl Youngblood wrote:
- I noticed that there are six different postmaster daemons running.
Only one of them is taking up a lot of RAM (1076m virtual and 584m
resident). The second one is using 181m resident while the others are
less than 20m each. Is it normal to have multiple postmaster
proce
10 matches
Mail list logo
