On Apr 5, 2005 12:16 AM, Christopher Petrilli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Looking at preliminary results from running with shared_buffers at > 16000, it seems this may be correct. Performance was flatter for a > BIT longer, but slammed right into the wall and started hitting the > 3-30 second range per COPY. I've restarted the run, with fsync turned > on (fdatasync), and we'll see. > > My fear is that it's some bizarre situation interacting with both > issues, and one that might not be solvable. Does anyone else have > much experience with this sort of sustained COPY?
Well, here's the results: http://www.amber.org/~petrilli/diagrams/pgsql_copy500_comparison.png The red is the run with shared_buffers turned up, but fsync off. The blue is the run with shared_buffers turned up, but fsync on. Note that it hits the wall sooner. Unfortunately, my brain is fried, and not sure what that means! Chris -- | Christopher Petrilli | [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
