Re: shared_buffers/effective_cache_size on 96GB server

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Strahinja Kustudić
<strahinjak@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @Claudio So you are basically saying that if I have set effective_cache_size
> to 10GB and I have 10 concurrent processes which are using 10 different
> indices which are for example 2GB, it would be better to set the
> effective_cache size to 1GB? Since if I leave it at 10GB each running
> process query planner will think the whole index is in cache and that won't
> be true? Did I get that right?

Yep. You might get away with setting 2GB, if you're willing to bet
there won't be 100% concurrency. But the safest setting would be 1G.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance



[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux