On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Kevin Grittner wrote:
checkpoint_segments = 50
Here's how I'm reading your data:
16:43:11 : Checkpoint start
16:44:23 : Checkpoint ends [ 1:22 long]
1:01 passes
16:45:24 : Checkpoint start
16:46:36 : checkpoint ends [1:22 long]
If you're getting a checkpoint every minute
>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 1:12 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My suggestion for a starting 8.3 configuration for you would be adjusting
> these settings as follows:
>
> shared_buffers=1GB
> checkpoint_segments = 50
I'm not into the most meaningfu
>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 1:12 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The other thing I realized you haven't mentioned yet is what operating
> system you're using.
Linux version 2.6.5-7.286-bigsmp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.3 (SuSE
Linux)) #
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007, Kevin Grittner wrote:
shared_buffers = 160MB
effective_cache_size = 5GB
bgwriter_lru_percent = 20.0
bgwriter_lru_maxpages = 200
bgwriter_all_percent = 10.0
bgwriter_all_maxpages = 600
checkpoint_segments = 10
The other thing I realized you haven't mentioned yet is what ope
>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 2:36 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>
>> The problem went away completely when we used a very aggressive
>> background writer configuration, to put the dirty pages in front of the
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Kevin Grittner wrote:
The problem went away completely when we used a very aggressive
background writer configuration, to put the dirty pages in front of the
OS file system right away, so that its algorithms and the controller
cache could deal with things before they got o
"Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When we first went to PostgreSQL our biggest problem was that dirty buffers
> would accumulate in shared memory until a checkpoint, and then overrun the
> controllers cache. This would cause disk reads to queue up behind the
> writes, and queries whic
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I've been lobbying management here for us to allocate some resources to
> testing 8.3 once it hits beta. If it is approved, it might happen on a time
> frame too short to get much feedback before the tests, so I'm throwing the
> question out here now: what would people l
I've been lobbying management here for us to allocate some resources to testing
8.3 once it hits beta. If it is approved, it might happen on a time frame too
short to get much feedback before the tests, so I'm throwing the question out
here now: what would people like us to bang on?
The box m
