On Aug 17, 2011, at 8:41 AM, Andy Colson wrote: > On 8/16/2011 8:35 PM, Ogden wrote: >> Hope all is well. I have received tremendous help from this list prior and >> therefore wanted some more advice. >> >> I bought some new servers and instead of RAID 5 (which I think greatly >> hindered our writing performance), I configured 6 SCSI 15K drives with RAID >> 10. This is dedicated to /var/lib/pgsql. The main OS has 2 SCSI 15K drives >> on a different virtual disk and also Raid 10, a total of 146Gb. I was >> thinking of putting Postgres' xlog directory on the OS virtual drive. Does >> this even make sense to do? >> >> The system memory is 64GB and the CPUs are dual Intel E5645 chips (they are >> 6-core each). >> >> It is a dedicated PostgreSQL box and needs to support heavy read and >> moderately heavy writes. >> >> Currently, I have this for the current system which as 16Gb Ram: >> >> max_connections = 350 >> >> work_mem = 32MB >> maintenance_work_mem = 512MB >> wal_buffers = 640kB >> >> # This is what I was helped with before and made reporting queries blaze by >> seq_page_cost = 1.0 >> random_page_cost = 3.0 >> cpu_tuple_cost = 0.5 >> effective_cache_size = 8192MB >> >> Any help and input is greatly appreciated. >> >> Thank you >> >> Ogden > > What seems to be the problem? I mean, if nothing is broke, then don't fix it > :-) > > You say reporting query's are fast, and the disk's should take care of your > slow write problem from before. (Did you test the write performance?) So, > whats wrong?
I was wondering what the best parameters would be with my new setup. The work_mem obviously will increase as will everything else as it's a 64Gb machine as opposed to a 16Gb machine. The configuration I posted was for a 16Gb machine but this new one is 64Gb. I needed help in how to jump these numbers up. Thank you Ogden -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
