Thomas Munro schrieb am 26.10.2018 um 22:13:
>>> I typically configure "shared_buffers = 4096MB" on my 16GB system as
>>> sometimes when testing, it pays off to have a bigger cache.
>>>
>>> With Postgres 10 and earlier, the Postgres process(es) would only
>>> allocate that memory from the
On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 6:10 AM Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> Jeff Janes schrieb am 26.10.2018 um 17:42:
> > I typically configure "shared_buffers = 4096MB" on my 16GB system as
> > sometimes when testing, it pays off to have a bigger cache.
> >
> > With Postgres 10 and earlier, the Postgres p
Jeff Janes schrieb am 26.10.2018 um 17:42:
I typically configure "shared_buffers = 4096MB" on my 16GB system as
sometimes when testing, it pays off to have a bigger cache.
With Postgres 10 and earlier, the Postgres process(es) would only allocate
that memory from the operating system w
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 9:12 AM Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> I have a Postgres instance running on my Windows laptop for testing
> purposes.
>
> I typically configure "shared_buffers = 4096MB" on my 16GB system as
> sometimes when testing, it pays off to have a bigger cache.
>
> With Postgres 10 and
I have a Postgres instance running on my Windows laptop for testing purposes.
I typically configure "shared_buffers = 4096MB" on my 16GB system as sometimes
when testing, it pays off to have a bigger cache.
With Postgres 10 and earlier, the Postgres process(es) would only allocate that
memory
