On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
>
> Tom Lane suggested in
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2004-02/msg00471.php
> that it might be better to set shared_buffers "relatively
> small" and let the filesystem cache do the buffering, so that's
> another way you can go
Luki Rustianto wrote:
> Ok I see. So what's the best way to find optimum value for
> various memory-related setting of postgresql ?
How much memory is there in the machine?
Are there other programs running or is the machine dedicated to the database?
Are the queries you run complicated (order / h
Ok I see. So what's the best way to find optimum value for various
memory-related setting of postgresql ?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> > I wonder how to find how much postgresql memory consumption
> > is (real, not allocated) ?
>
> You could install the pg_buffercache co
> I wonder how to find how much postgresql memory consumption
> is (real, not allocated) ?
You could install the pg_buffercache contrib and
SELECT pg_size_pretty(
CAST(current_setting('block_size') AS integer) * max(bufferid)
)
FROM pg_buffercache WHERE relfilenode IS NOT NULL;
Hi all,
I wonder how to find how much postgresql memory consumption is (real, not
allocated) ?
thx.
