On Monday December 5 2005 3:17 pm, Tom Lane wrote: > There isn't any particularly good reason to be resizing > shared_buffers on the fly anyway; much easier to let the > kernel adapt the size of its disk cache instead. Best > practice for shared_buffers is to set it somewhere in the > range of 10K to 50K and forget it. Oh, how I wish it were so on these boxes. However, HP gurus tell me that OS dynamic buffer caches larger than ~800MB +/- slop have diminishing returns due to contention between vhand and others. Therefore, to most effectively take advantage of a big multi-cluster box with gobs of RAM for DB caching, it seems to me I need to specifically allocate the available RAM among the DB clusters. [This is a pain and I'd much rather the OS did it for me.] Of course, we don't know how many clusters we'll have and of what size when we start. Thus, the need for resizing the DB caches as new clusters come online. Does that make sense? Ed
