Re: [GENERAL] optimum settings for dedicated box

[Kelly Burkhart]

On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 00:50 -0700, Matthew Peter wrote:
> Hmmm. I was thinking of a more comprehensive solution
> or document resource. I would like to know what does
> what. Why tweak that or why not to ya know?

Matt,

I've found the annotated postgresql.conf references on this page (as
well as rest of the site) to be helpful.



-K

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Re: [GENERAL] optimum settings for dedicated box

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 00:50:20 -0700,
  Matthew Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Is 8.1 to early to use in a production environment?
> With just the regular old 8.0.3 stuff? 

8.1 is still in early beta and you definitely don't want to use it in
production. It has some nice improvements, so you at least want to look at
the tentative release notes to see if you might want to upgrade to it
sooner rather than later.

8.0.4 will be being released shortly (probably in a few days) and you will
want to use that in preference to 8.0.3.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Re: [GENERAL] optimum settings for dedicated box

[Matthew Peter]

Hmmm. I was thinking of a more comprehensive solution
or document resource. I would like to know what does
what. Why tweak that or why not to ya know?

Searching gets me such fragmented results I chose to
ask the ones whom are more familiar with this fabulous
piece of software and used it in real world
situations.  

Does anyone know of a some good docs on the subject of
dedicated db optimization for postgresql 8.0.3? 

Is 8.1 to early to use in a production environment?
With just the regular old 8.0.3 stuff? 

Thanks for the tips too. I always appreciate tips. :)

Thanks again,
Matthew A. Peter


--- "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 09:43:19PM -0700, Ian
> Harding wrote:
> > Mine in similar, and the only thing I have changed
> from defaults is
> > work_mem.  It made certain complex queries go from
> taking forever to
> > taking seconds.  I have a database connection pool
> limited to 10
> > connections, so I set it to 10MB.  That means (to
> me, anyway) that
> > work_mem will never gobble more then 100MB.  Seems
> OK since I have
> > 1GB.
> 
> That's not totally true. A single query can use
> work_mem for multiple
> steps, so if work_mem is 10MB a single query could
> end up using 20MB,
> 30MB, or even more.
> -- 
> Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Pervasive Softwarehttp://pervasive.com  
>  512-569-9461
> 
> ---(end of
> broadcast)---
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please
> send an appropriate
>subscribe-nomail command to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
>message can get through to the mailing list
> cleanly
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Re: [GENERAL] optimum settings for dedicated box

[Jim C. Nasby]

On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 09:43:19PM -0700, Ian Harding wrote:
> Mine in similar, and the only thing I have changed from defaults is
> work_mem.  It made certain complex queries go from taking forever to
> taking seconds.  I have a database connection pool limited to 10
> connections, so I set it to 10MB.  That means (to me, anyway) that
> work_mem will never gobble more then 100MB.  Seems OK since I have
> 1GB.

That's not totally true. A single query can use work_mem for multiple
steps, so if work_mem is 10MB a single query could end up using 20MB,
30MB, or even more.
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pervasive Softwarehttp://pervasive.com512-569-9461

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Re: [GENERAL] optimum settings for dedicated box

[Ian Harding]

Mine in similar, and the only thing I have changed from defaults is
work_mem.  It made certain complex queries go from taking forever to
taking seconds.  I have a database connection pool limited to 10
connections, so I set it to 10MB.  That means (to me, anyway) that
work_mem will never gobble more then 100MB.  Seems OK since I have
1GB.

Free space map should probably be tweaked too, if you have lots of
updates or deletes.  I think.

- Ian

On 8/30/05, Matt A. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wondering what the optimum settings are for an
> dedicated postgresql database box? The box is an
> 2.8ghz processor, 1gig ram (soon will be 4) and raid 1
> (mirroring) across two 10k rpm SCSI disks. I only have
> a single database on it running linux of course. Thanks.
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
> ---(end of broadcast)---
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
>choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
>match
>

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

[GENERAL] optimum settings for dedicated box

[Matt A.]

Wondering what the optimum settings are for an
dedicated postgresql database box? The box is an
2.8ghz processor, 1gig ram (soon will be 4) and raid 1
(mirroring) across two 10k rpm SCSI disks. I only have
a single database on it running linux of course. Thanks.

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match