>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:05:54 -0500, Matthew Glanville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> said:
> BUFPOOLSIZE when it is too large, which my guess is the point at > which a search through that much memory takes longer than a disk > read. The larger it it gets, the slower database reads get... This > mostly affects incremental backups of systems with large amounts of > files, and expiration processes. When I had it set to 4 GB or > higher performance was slow, 30 GB horrendous, currently it is set > to 1 GB, performance is acceptable, but maybe it can be lower for > even better performance, until there is some other low point at > which too low makes it slower again as repetitive disk i/o > increases. Sounds like that would make a fascinating chart. And the recommended formula would have led you to something like 20G, right? With the really slow points, was the cache hit percentage good? - Allen S. Rout
