On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marl...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Mike McCann <mcc...@mbari.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > We are in the fortunate situation of having more money than time to help > > solve our PostgreSQL 9.1 performance problem. > > > > Our server hosts databases that are about 1 GB in size with the largest > > tables having order 10 million 20-byte indexed records. The data are > loaded > > once and then read from a web app and other client programs. Some of the > > queries execute ORDER BY on the results. There are typically less than a > > dozen read-only concurrent connections to any one database. > I wouldn't count on this being a problem that can be fixed merely by throwing money at it. How many rows does any one of these queries need to access and then ORDER BY? ... > > > HP ProLiant DL360p Gen 8 > > Dual Intel Xeon 2.4GHz 4-core E5-2609 CPUs > > 64GB RAM > > 2x146GB 15K SAS hard drives > > 3x200GB SATA SLC SSDs > > + the usual accessories (optical drive, rail kit, dual power supplies) > > If your DB is 1G, and will grow to 10G then the IO shouldn't be any > problem, as the whole db should be cached in memory. But it can take a surprisingly long time to get it cached in the first place, from a cold start. If that is the problem, pg_prewarm could help. Cheers, Jeff
