On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, Martin Foster wrote:

> to roughly 175 or more.     Essentially, the machine seems to struggle 
> to keep up with continual requests and slows down respectively as 
> resources are tied down.

I suggest you try to find queries that are slow and check to see if the 
plans are optimal for those queries.

There are some logging options for logging quries that run longer then a 
user set limit. That can help finding the slow queries. Just doing some 
logging for some typical page fetches often show things that can be done 
better. For example, it's not uncommon to see the same information beeing 
pulled several times by misstake.

Maybe you can also try something like connection pooling. I'm not sure how
much that can give, but for small queries the connection time is usually
the big part.

> Would disabling 'fsync' provide more performance if I choose that
> information may be lost in case of a crash?

I would not do that. In most cases the performance increase is modest and
the data corruption risk after a crash is much bigger so it's not worth

If you have a lot of small inserts then it might be faster with this, but
if possible it's much better to try to do more work in a transaction then 

/Dennis Björklund

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
    (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])

Reply via email to