Re: Server misconfiguration???
От | Andy |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Server misconfiguration??? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 001201c5cda7$4314b430$0b00a8c0@forge обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Server misconfiguration??? ("Andy" <frum@ar-sd.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Server misconfiguration???
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
When I ment memory allocation, I look with htop to see the process list, CPU load, memory, swap. So I didn't ment the a postgre process uses that amount of memory. I read some tuning things, I made the things that are written there, but I think that there improvements can be made. regards, Andy. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> To: "Andy" <frum@ar-sd.net> Cc: <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 5:18 PM Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Server misconfiguration??? > "Andy" <frum@ar-sd.net> writes: >> I get the feeling the server is somehow missconfigured or it does not >> work at full parameter. If I look at memory allocation, it never goes >> over 250MB whatever I do with the database. > > That is not wrong. Postgres expects the kernel to be doing disk > caching, so the amount of memory that's effectively being used for > database work includes not only what is shown as belonging to the > PG processes, but some portion of the kernel disk buffers as well. > You don't really *want* the processes eating all of available RAM. > > I concur with Chris K-L's comments that you should reduce rather > than increase your settings. > > regards, tom lane > >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: