This is a discussion on How much ram is too much within the Pgsql Performance forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> Is it possible that providing 128G of ram is too much ? Will other systems in the server bottleneck ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| Is it possible that providing 128G of ram is too much ? Will other systems in the server bottleneck ? Dave ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq |
| |||
| Dave Cramer wrote: > Is it possible that providing 128G of ram is too much ? Will other > systems in the server bottleneck ? What CPU and OS are you considering? -- Guy Rouillier ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate |
| |||
| What is your expected data size and usage pattern? What are the other components in the system? On Fri, 8 Jun 2007, Dave Cramer wrote: > Is it possible that providing 128G of ram is too much ? Will other systems in > the server bottleneck ? > > Dave > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster |
| |||
| It's an IBM x3850 using linux redhat 4.0 On 8-Jun-07, at 12:46 PM, Guy Rouillier wrote: > Dave Cramer wrote: >> Is it possible that providing 128G of ram is too much ? Will other >> systems in the server bottleneck ? > > What CPU and OS are you considering? > > -- > Guy Rouillier > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at > > http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings |
| |||
| > On Fri, 8 Jun 2007, Dave Cramer wrote: > >> Is it possible that providing 128G of ram is too much ? Will other systems >> in the server bottleneck ? the only way 128G of ram would be too much is if your total database size (including indexes) is smaller then this. now it may not gain you as much of an advantage going from 64G to 128G as it does going from 32G to 64G, but that depends on many variables as others have been asking. David Lang ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org |
| |||
| Dave Cramer írta: > It's an IBM x3850 using linux redhat 4.0 Isn't that a bit old? I have a RedHat 4.2 somewhere that was bundled with Applixware 3. :-) -- ---------------------------------- Zoltán Böszörményi Cybertec Geschwinde & Schönig GmbH http://www.postgresql.at/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster |
| |||
| david@lang.hm wrote: >> On Fri, 8 Jun 2007, Dave Cramer wrote: >> >>> Is it possible that providing 128G of ram is too much ? Will other >>> systems >>> in the server bottleneck ? > > the only way 128G of ram would be too much is if your total database > size (including indexes) is smaller then this. > > now it may not gain you as much of an advantage going from 64G to 128G > as it does going from 32G to 64G, but that depends on many variables as > others have been asking. I don't know about the IBM but I know some of the HPs require slower ram to actually get to 128G. Joshua D. Drake > > David Lang > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org |
| |||
| Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote: > Dave Cramer írta: >> It's an IBM x3850 using linux redhat 4.0 > > Isn't that a bit old? I have a RedHat 4.2 somewhere > that was bundled with Applixware 3. :-) He means redhat ES/AS 4 I assume. J > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend |
| |||
| On 8-Jun-07, at 2:10 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote: >> Dave Cramer írta: >>> It's an IBM x3850 using linux redhat 4.0 >> Isn't that a bit old? I have a RedHat 4.2 somewhere >> that was bundled with Applixware 3. :-) > > He means redhat ES/AS 4 I assume. > Yes AS4 > J > > > > > -- > > === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === > Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 > Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 > http://www.commandprompt.com/ > > Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/ > donate > PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings |
| ||||
| Joshua D. Drake írta: > Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote: >> Dave Cramer írta: >>> It's an IBM x3850 using linux redhat 4.0 >> >> Isn't that a bit old? I have a RedHat 4.2 somewhere >> that was bundled with Applixware 3. :-) > > He means redhat ES/AS 4 I assume. > > J I guessed that, hence the smiley. But it's very unfortunate that version numbers are reused - it can cause confusion. There was a RH 4.0 already a long ago, when the commercial and the community version were the same. I think Microsoft will avoid reusing its versions when year 2095 comes. :-) -- ---------------------------------- Zoltán Böszörményi Cybertec Geschwinde & Schönig GmbH http://www.postgresql.at/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster |