There are many reports of kernel problems with memory allocation
(too agressive) and swap issues with RHEL 3.0 on both RAID
and non-RAID systems. I hope folks have worked through all
those issues before blaming postgresql.
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> If I thought that a 200% error in memory usage were cause for a Chinese
> fire drill, then I'd say "yeah, let's do that". The problem is that the
> place where performance actually goes into the toilet is normally an
> order of magnitude or two above the nominal sort_mem setting (for
> obvious reasons: admins can't afford to push the envelope on sort_mem
> because of the various unpredictable multiples that may apply). So
> switching to a hugely more expensive implementation as soon as we exceed
> some arbitrary limit is likely to be a net loss not a win.
>
> If you can think of a spill methodology that has a gentle degradation
> curve, then I'm all for that. But I doubt there are any quick-hack
> improvements to be had here.
>
> regards, tom lane
--
P. J. "Josh" Rovero Sonalysts, Inc.
Email: rovero@sonalysts.com www.sonalysts.com 215 Parkway North
Work: (860)326-3671 or 442-4355 Waterford CT 06385
***********************************************************************