On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Greg Smith <gsm...@gregsmith.com> wrote: > The next fine-tuning bit I'd normally apply in this situation is to see if > increasing checkpoint_completion_target from the default (0.5) to 0.9 does > anything to flatten out that response time graph. I've seen a modest > increase in wal_buffers (from the default to, say, 1MB) help smooth out the > rough spots too.
Hi all, After yet another delay, I have .6 to .9 (I forgot .5. :(): http://pugs.postgresql.org/node/526 I don't think the effects of the checkpoint_completion_target are significant, and I sort of feel it's because the entire database is on a single device. I've started doing some runs with the database log on a separate device, so I'll be trying some of these parameters again. Regards, Mark -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
