On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Ondrej Ivanič <ondrej.ivanic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Generally going over 4GB for shared_buffers doesn't help.. some of the >> overhead of bgwriter and checkpoints is more or less linear in the size of >> shared_buffers .. > > Nothing is black or white; It's all shades of Grey :) It depends on > workload. In my case external consultants recommended 8GB and I was > able to increase it up to 10GB. This was mostly read-only workload. > From my experience large buffer cache acts as handbrake for > write-heavy workloads. Which makes me ask... ...why can't checkpoint_timeout be set above 1h? Mostly for the checkpoint target thing. I know, you'd need an unholy amount of WAL and recovery time, but modern systems I think can handle that (especially if you don't care much about recovery time). I usually set checkpoint_timeout to approach the time between periodic mass updates, and it works rather nice. Except when those updates are spaced more than 1h, my hands are tied. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
