On Jun 28, 2007, at 7:55 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
Do you need to increase shared_buffers in such case?


If you have something going wild creating dirty buffers with a high usage count faster than they are being written to disk, increasing the size of the shared_buffers cache can just make the problem worse--now you have an ever bigger pile of dirty mess to shovel at checkpoint time. The existing background writers are particularly unsuited to helping out in this situation, I think the new planned implementation will be much better.

Is this still a serious issue with LDC? I share Greg Stark's concern that we're going to end up wasting a lot of writes.

Perhaps part of the problem is that we're using a single count to track buffer usage; perhaps we need separate counts for reads vs writes?
--
Jim Nasby                                            [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

               http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Reply via email to