On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 4:26 PM, David Jarvis <[email protected]> wrote:
> shared_buffers = 1GB
> temp_buffers = 32MB
> work_mem = 32MB
> maintenance_work_mem = 64MB
> effective_cache_size = 256MB

Shouldn't effective_cache_size be significantly larger?

-- 
Rob Wultsch
[email protected]

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

Reply via email to