Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Montag 15 Juni 2009 Tom Lane wrote: >> These two settings are probably the cause. With shared_buffers at >> 2GB, you do not have anywhere near 1GB to play around with in a >> 32-bit environment. Try something like 200M and 500M. > Wouldn't a recommendation to switch to 64bit PostgreSQL be a good idea > also? Maybe his servers can't do that, I don't know. If he wants numbers that high, he'd need to go to a 64bit build. It's not clear from here whether any actual benefit would ensue, though. > Also, I've heard that using shared_buffers = 500MB is enough (even in > 64bit), and the rest will be cached by Linux cache alone. Is that true? Yeah, the existence of kernel disk cache tends to negate the benefit of very large shared_buffer settings. See the pgsql-performance archives for many many discussions about such matters. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
