Kevin Schroeder wrote:
It looks to me like you are using no (device or file) swap at all, and
have 1.3G of real memory free, so could in fact give Postgres more of it :-)
Indeed.
If you DO run into trouble after giving Postgres more RAM, use the vmstat
command.
You can use this command like
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to upgrade both OS kernel and PGsql version , so in my opinion the
best way to handle it is to *backup* the data in .tar
Just remember if you're going from 7.3.2 = 7.4.x or 8.0 then you'll
need to use pg_dump not just tar up the directories. If you do use
You can *not* go from any major release to another major release using
any kind of file backup. Please use pg_dump.
Additionally there are known issues dumping and restoring from 7.3 -
7.4 if you use the default copy command. Use the pg_dump --inserts option.
I would still tar the directory
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
Kevin Schroeder wrote:
Ignoring the fact that the sort and vacuum numbers are really high,
this is what Solaris shows me when running top:
Memory: 2048M real, 1376M free, 491M swap in use, 2955M swap free
Maybe check the swap usage with 'swap -l' which reports reliably if
po and pi are relatively low, but do pick up when there's an increase in
activity. I am seeing a lot of minor faults, though. vmstat -S 5 reports
[9:38am]# vmstat -S 5
procs memorypagedisk faults cpu
r b w swap free si so pi po fr de sr s0 s1 s3
I take that back. There actually is some paging going on. I ran sar -g 5
10 and when a request was made (totally about 10 DB queries) my pgout/s
jumped to 5.8 and my ppgout/s jumped to 121.8. pgfree/s also jumped to
121.80.
Kevin
- Original Message -
From: Matt Casters [EMAIL
I suspect that the memory is being used to cache files as well since the
email boxes are using unix mailboxes, for the time being. With people
checking their email sometimes once per minute I can see why Solaris would
want to cache those files. Perhaps my question would be more appropriate to
/tmp doesn't seem to be much of a problem. I have about 1k worth of data in
there and 72k in /var/tmp.
Would turning swap off help in tuning the database in this regard? top is
reporting that there's 1.25GB of RAM free on a 2GB system so, in my
estimation, there's no need for PostgreSQL to
Kevin Schroeder wrote:
I suspect that the memory is being used to cache files as well since
the email boxes are using unix mailboxes, for the time being. With
people checking their email sometimes once per minute I can see why
Solaris would want to cache those files. Perhaps my question would
Alan Stange wrote:
Note that files in /tmp are usually in a tmpfs file system. These
files may be the usage of swap that you're seeing (as they will be paged
out on an active system with some memory pressure)
You can do a couple things with /tmp. Create a separate file system
for it so it
Maybe, I'm just seeing a problem where none exists. I ran sar -w 3 100 and
I actually did not see any swap activity despite the fact that I've got
500+MB of swap file being used.
Kevin
- Original Message -
From: Alan Stange [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Kevin Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
The primary goal is to reduce the number of seeks a disk or array has
to perform. Serial write throughput is much higher than random write
throughput. If you are performing very high volume throughput on a
server that is doing multiple things, then it maybe advisable to have
one partition for
Kevin Schroeder wrote:
I take that back. There actually is some paging going on. I ran sar
-g 5 10 and when a request was made (totally about 10 DB queries) my
pgout/s jumped to 5.8 and my ppgout/s jumped to 121.8. pgfree/s also
jumped to 121.80.
I'm fairly sure that the pi and po numbers
I may be asking the question the wrong way, but when I start up PostgreSQL
swap is what gets used the most of. I've got 1282MB free RAM right now and
and 515MB swap in use. Granted, swap file usage probably wouldn't be zero,
but I would guess that it should be a lot lower so something must be
On Jan 19, 2005, at 10:42 AM, Alan Stange wrote:
Kevin Schroeder wrote:
I take that back. There actually is some paging going on. I ran sar
-g 5 10 and when a request was made (totally about 10 DB queries) my
pgout/s jumped to 5.8 and my ppgout/s jumped to 121.8. pgfree/s also
jumped to
I think it's probably just reserving them. I can't think of anything else.
Also, when I run swap activity with sar I don't see any activity, which also
points to reserved swap space, not used swap space.
swap -s reports
total: 358336k bytes allocated + 181144k reserved = 539480k used, 2988840k
Kevin Schroeder wrote:
I may be asking the question the wrong way, but when I start up
PostgreSQL swap is what gets used the most of. I've got 1282MB free
RAM right now and and 515MB swap in use. Granted, swap file usage
probably wouldn't be zero, but I would guess that it should be a lot
On Jan 19, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Kevin Schroeder wrote:
I may be asking the question the wrong way, but when I start up
PostgreSQL swap is what gets used the most of. I've got 1282MB free
RAM right now and and 515MB swap in use. Granted, swap file usage
probably wouldn't be zero, but I would
This page may be of use:
http://www.serverworldmagazine.com/monthly/2003/02/solaris.shtml
From personal experience, for god's sake don't think Solaris' VM/swap
implementation is easy - it's damn good, but it ain't easy!
Matt
Kevin Schroeder wrote:
I think it's probably just reserving them. I
Well, easy it ain't and I believe it's good. One final question: When I
run sar -w I get no swap activity, but the process switch column registers
between 400 and 700 switches per second. Would that be in the normal range
for a medium-use system?
Thanks
Kevin
- Original Message -
Hi,
Has anyone had any
experiance with any of the Areca SATA RAID controllers? I was looking at a 3ware
onebut it won't fit in the 2U case we have so the sales guy recommended
these.
Cheers,
Benjamin
Wragg
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version:
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 09:40 -0600, Kevin Schroeder wrote:
I may be asking the question the wrong way, but when I start up PostgreSQL
swap is what gets used the most of. I've got 1282MB free RAM right now and
and 515MB swap in use. Granted, swap file usage probably wouldn't be zero,
but I
Thanks. That sorts out all my questions regarding disk configuration. One
more regarding RAID. Is RAID 1+0 and 0+1 essentially the same at a
performance level?
Thanks,
Benjamin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alex Turner
Sent: Thursday,
Hi folks,
Running on 7.4.2, recently vacuum analysed the three tables in
question.
The query plan in question changes dramatically when a WHERE clause
changes from ports.broken to ports.deprecated. I don't see why.
Well, I do see why: a sequential scan of a 130,000 rows. The query
goes
Hi,
I'm trying to tune a query that is taking to long to execute. I haven't done
much sql tuning and have only had a little exposure to explain and explain
analyze but from what I've read on the list and in books the following is
generally true:
Seq Scans are the almost always evil (except if
Hi,
Anyone have tips for performance of Postgresql, running on HP-UX 11.11,
PA-RISC (HP RP3410)? What is better compiler (GCC or HP C/ANSI), flags of
compilation, kernel and FS tunning?
I have installed pgsql, and compiled with gcc -O2
-fexpensive-optimizations flags only.
Another question:
Let's see if I have been paying enough attention to the SQL gurus. The planner
is making a different estimate of how many deprecated'' versus how many
broken ''. I would try SET STATISTICS to a larger number on the ports table,
and re-analyze.
---(end of
27 matches
Mail list logo
