Re: [PERFORM] PGAvd

>Is the auto-vacuum daemon a new feature for 7.4, or is there a version for >7.3.3? It's a bit unclear from the PGAvd page ... It was added to CVS as of 7.4. It works perfectly well with 7.3.x -- let name="cbbrowne" and tld="libertyrms.info" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;

Re: [PERFORM] PGAvd

I think it is new for 7.4. I don't see it in 7.3.X CVS. --- Josh Berkus wrote: > Folks, > > Is the auto-vacuum daemon a new feature for 7.4, or is there a version for > 7.3.3? It's a bit unclear from the PGAvd page ...

[PERFORM] PGAvd

Folks, Is the auto-vacuum daemon a new feature for 7.4, or is there a version for 7.3.3? It's a bit unclear from the PGAvd page ... -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is you

Re: [PERFORM] Tunning FreeeBSD and PostgreSQL

Vivek Khera wrote: > > "SH" == Stephen Howie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > SH> Richard- > SH> That was very helpfull Thanks! > SH> I still would like some guidance on tunning FreeBSD (shmmax and shmmaxpgs). > SH> Do I need to even touch these settings? > > Here's what I use on FreeBSD 4.7/4

Re: [PERFORM] Commenting postgresql.conf

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Josh Berkus wrote: > Folks, > > There was a general consensus (I think) on this list that we want more verbose > comments in postgresql.conf for 7.4. Is anyone available to do the work? > We'll need the patch this week ... I'll help. this is probably the kind of thing

[PERFORM] Mass file imports

Hello, I'm hunting for some advice on loading 50,000+ files all less than 32KB to a 7.3.2 database. The table is simple. create table files ( idint8 not null primary key, file text not null, size int8 not null, uid int not null, raw oid ); The script (currently bash) pulls a TAR fi

[PERFORM] Commenting postgresql.conf

Folks, There was a general consensus (I think) on this list that we want more verbose comments in postgresql.conf for 7.4. Is anyone available to do the work? We'll need the patch this week ... -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---(end of bro

Re: [PERFORM] Help disk-pages

See postgres -t and the statistics tables to see block read, and the chapter on Disk Space Monitor to find disk sizes. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi all! I'm new to Postgresql and I'm trying solve a problem: is there

Re: [PERFORM] Dual Xeon + HW RAID question

SZUCS Gábor wrote: > Alexandre, > > I missed your orig. post, but AFAIK multiprocessing kernels will handle HT > CPUs as 2 CPUs each. Thus, our dual Xeon 2.4 is recognized as 4 Xeon 2.4 > CPUs. > > This way, I don't think HT would improve any single query (afaik no postgres > process uses more th

Re: [PERFORM] Dual Xeon + HW RAID question

SZUCS, In my tests, I don´t a great performance enhacement with HT. I suspect that my problem resides on I/O performance. I will wait for a best moment to resinstall the system with other disk configurations and then I will report here. Thanks for all replys! Alexandre > Alexandre, > > I miss

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

On 2003-07-21 09:06:10 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Alexander, > > > Hmmm. Seems to me that this setup would be better than one RAID5 with three > > 36Gb disks, wouldn't you think so? With one RAID5 array, I would still have > > the data and the WAL on one volume... > > Definitely. As I've said,

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

Alexander, > Hmmm. Seems to me that this setup would be better than one RAID5 with three > 36Gb disks, wouldn't you think so? With one RAID5 array, I would still have > the data and the WAL on one volume... Definitely. As I've said, my experience with RAID5 is that with less than 5 disks, it p

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

That's true, certainly, and with four disks (2x18 and 2x72 or 36), I would be able to (a) be safe and (b) split the data and WAL. Hmmm. Seems to me that this setup would be better than one RAID5 with three 36Gb disks, wouldn't you think so? With one RAID5 array, I would still have the data and the

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

> What would you guys think of not using RAID5 in that case, but just a really > fast 15.000 rpm SCSI-320 disk? I'd say you must be able to tolerate losing all the data since your last database backup. Your battery backed cache, rotational speed, and transfer rate aren't going to help at all

Re: [PERFORM] Optimizer differences between 7.2 and 7.3

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?SZUCS_G=E1bor?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > do regex ops (~, ~*) use index scan in non-"C" locales? Is it worth to > convert LIKE to regex? The locale issues are the same either way. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)-

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

Thanks, i'll look further into these mount setting. I was just thinking, the server will have a (RAID) controller containing 128Mb of battery-backed cache memory. This would really speed up inserts to the disk and would prevent data loss in case of a power-down also. What would you guys think of

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

On 21 Jul 2003 at 13:45, Alexander Priem wrote: > So where can I set the noatime & data=writeback variables? They are not > PostgreSQL settings, but rather Linux settings, right? Where can I find > these? These are typicaly set in /etc/fstab.conf. These are mount settings. man mount for more det

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

So where can I set the noatime & data=writeback variables? They are not PostgreSQL settings, but rather Linux settings, right? Where can I find these? Kind regards, Alexander Priem. - Original Message - From: "Shridhar Daithankar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday,

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

On 21 Jul 2003 at 19:27, Ang Chin Han wrote: > [1] That is, AFAIK, from our testing. Please, please correct me if I'm > wrong: has anyone found that different filesystems produces wildly > different performance for postgresql, FreeBSD's filesystems not included? well, when postgresql starts spli

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Good for you. You have time at hand to find out which one suits you best. Do the testing before you have load that needs another FS..:-) Kinda my point is that when we've more load, we'd be using RAID-0 over RAID-5, or getting faster SCSI drives, or even turn fsync off

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

On 21 Jul 2003 at 18:09, Ang Chin Han wrote: > Shridhar Daithankar wrote: > > On 21 Jul 2003 at 11:23, Alexander Priem wrote: > > >>I use ext3 filesystem, which probably is not the best performer, is it? > > > > No. You also need to check ext2, reiser and XFS. There is no agreement between > >

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On 21 Jul 2003 at 11:23, Alexander Priem wrote: I use ext3 filesystem, which probably is not the best performer, is it? No. You also need to check ext2, reiser and XFS. There is no agreement between users as in what works best. You need to benchmark and decide. Need? Ma

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

Thanks, I will look at the site you sent me and purchase some hardware. Then I will run some benchmarks. Kind regards, Alexander. - Original Message - From: "Shridhar Daithankar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Alexander Priem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

Hi Alexander , On 21 Jul 2003 at 11:23, Alexander Priem wrote: > So the memory settings I specified are pretty much OK? As of now yes, You need to test with these settings and make sure that they perform as per your requirement. That tweaking will always be there... > What would be good guideli

Re: [PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

On 21 Jul 2003 at 10:31, Alexander Priem wrote: > What I am thinking about is buying a server with the following specifications: > > * 1 or 2 Intel Xeon processors (2.4 GHz). > * 2 Gigabytes of RAM (DDR/ECC). > * Three 36Gb SCSI160 disks (10.000rpm) in a RAID-5 config, giving 72Gb storage > space

[PERFORM] Tuning PostgreSQL

Hi guys,   I am new to PostgreSQL and have done some "extensive" research already. If you could give me some advice/confirmation, I would be really grateful.   I am going to build a PostgreSQL database server for a client. This database will contain many tables (over 100, maybe more), with s

Re: [PERFORM] Optimizer differences between 7.2 and 7.3

A bit OT: do regex ops (~, ~*) use index scan in non-"C" locales? Is it worth to convert LIKE to regex? G. --- cut here --- - Original Message - From: "Richard Huxton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 4:40 PM Check