[replying to -performance]
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi, I have the following query - is there anything i've missed or is it
> just slow?!
The fact that it underestimates the number of matching message rows by a
factor of about 4000 doesn't help. I'm not sure you're going t
> "SH" == Stephen Howie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SH> Richard-
SH> That was very helpfull Thanks!
SH> I still would like some guidance on tunning FreeBSD (shmmax and shmmaxpgs).
SH> Do I need to even touch these settings?
Here's what I use on FreeBSD 4.7/4.8. The kernel settings don't hurt
Vivek,
Thanks, for your reply. May I ask what you system setup is like (i.e.
memory and such)?
- Original Message -
From: "Vivek Khera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: ml.postgres.performance
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Tunning Fr
> "SH" == Stephen Howie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SH> Vivek,
SH> Thanks, for your reply. May I ask what you system setup is like (i.e.
SH> memory and such)?
Current box is dual P3 1GHz and 2GB RAM. RAID0+1 on 4 disks. I'm
about to order a bigger box, since I'm saturating the disk bandwi
Joe,
> Regarding the document at
> http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/Tidbits/perf.html#maxfsmp
>
> In section 3.3 you say max_fsm_pages should be set to the number of pages
> that vacuum reports. Does that apply to table pages only or both table and
> index pages? Because I'm finding my index p
