Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 10:14:47 -0400 From: Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org> To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Manipulating disk cache (buf) settings Message-ID: <F215F50A-3806-4838-9B05-7D75CF662698@khera.org> In-Reply-To: <20050523232948.GJ959@funkthat.com> References: <1116860293.10083.43.camel@lanshark.dmv.com> <20050523174415.GI959@funkthat.com> <1F46458B-2524-42AB-8B3D-0F54F485241B@khera.org> <20050523232948.GJ959@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 23, 2005, at 7:29 PM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > Vivek Khera wrote this message on Mon, May 23, 2005 at 17:17 -0400: >> >> Cool... So what would you recommend telling an application like >> Postgres what the cache size is? All of RAM? That seems unlikely >> given much of the ram is used for other things. Is there no upper >> bound in how much RAM will be used for the cache? >> > > I'm not familar host Postgres uses the cache number to change it's > behavior, but I would say choose a responable amount of memory that > you expect to regularly have available on the system... If you are > only using it for db, and a few other small processes, 512meg less > than ram is probably reasonable... Thanks. Since PG also uses a bunch of RAM for internal ops like sorting and such, I suspect telling it that 50% of RAM is available for cache will be good. Testing theory now... :-) Vivek Khera, Ph.D. +1-301-869-4449 x806
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F215F50A-3806-4838-9B05-7D75CF662698>