The card is configured in 1+0 . with 128k stripe afaik (I'm a
developer, we don't have hardware guys here).
Are you's sure about the lack of cache by default on the card ? I
thought the difference is that 5104 has 256, and 5105 has 512 ram
already on it.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing
On 26/05/11 20:11, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
The card is configured in 1+0 . with 128k stripe afaik (I'm a
developer, we don't have hardware guys here).
Are you's sure about the lack of cache by default on the card ? I
thought the difference is that 5104 has 256, and 5105 has 512 ram
already on
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Steve Crawford
scrawf...@pinpointresearch.com wrote:
On 05/25/2011 11:45 AM, Reuven M. Lerner wrote:
Hi, Alex. You wrote:
Have you tried something like:
SELECT
Hi there,
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Is there a way to determine the values actually used?
The pg_settings view. Try the query shown here:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Server_Configuration
Thanks Kevin, very usful. Here is the output:
version;PostgreSQL 9.0.4, compiled by Visual C++ build
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Steve Crawford
scrawf...@pinpointresearch.com wrote:
On 05/25/2011 11:45 AM, Reuven M. Lerner wrote:
Hi, Alex.
Wow.
Color me impressed and grateful. I've been working on a different
project today, but I'll test these tonight.
I'll never underestimate the regexp functionality in PostgreSQL again!
Reuven
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
2011/5/26 panam pa...@gmx.net:
Hi there,
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Is there a way to determine the values actually used?
The pg_settings view. Try the query shown here:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Server_Configuration
Thanks Kevin, very usful. Here is the output:
version;PostgreSQL
Hello performers, I've long been unhappy with the standard advice
given for setting shared buffers. This includes the stupendously
vague comments in the standard documentation, which suggest certain
settings in order to get 'good performance'. Performance of what?
Connection negotiation speed?
Cédric Villemaincedric.villemain.deb...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 panam pa...@gmx.net:
max_connections;100
work_mem;1GB
Each connection can allocate work_mem, potentially several times.
On a machines without hundreds of GB of RAM, that pair of settings
could cause severe swapping.
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
So, the challenge is this: I'd like to see repeatable test cases
that demonstrate regular performance gains 20%. Double bonus
points for cases that show gains 50%.
Are you talking throughput, maximum latency, or some other metric?
In our shop
On 05/26/2011 05:36 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
...
got it:
select decode(regexp_replace('141142143', '([0-9][0-9][0-9])',
$q$\\\1$q$ , 'g'), 'escape');
decode
abc
(1 row)
merlin
Nice. A word of warning, in 9.0 this returns a hex string:
select decode(regexp_replace('141142143',
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
So, the challenge is this: I'd like to see repeatable test cases
that demonstrate regular performance gains 20%. Double bonus
points for cases that show gains 50%.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Point being: cranking buffers
may have been the bee's knees with, say, the 8.2 buffer manager, but
present and future improvements may have render that change moot or
even counter productive.
I suggest you read the docs
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Point being: cranking buffers
may have been the bee's knees with, say, the 8.2 buffer manager, but
present and future improvements may have
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
The point is what we can prove, because going through the
motions of doing that is useful.
Exactly, and whatever you can prove will be workload-dependant.
So you can't prove anything generally, since no single setting is
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
The point is what we can prove, because going through the
motions of doing that is useful.
Exactly, and whatever you can prove will be
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Robert Klemme
shortcut...@googlemail.comwrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Dave Johansen davejohan...@gmail.com
wrote:
I am using Postgres 8.3.3 and I have a VIEW which is a UNION ALL of two
tables but when I do a select on the view using a LIMIT, it
Dave Johansen davejohan...@gmail.com writes:
... So is there a way to make the
planner perform the same sort of operation and push those same constraints
into the sub-queries on its own?
No. As was mentioned upthread, there is a solution for this in 9.1,
although it doesn't work in exactly
panam pa...@gmx.net wrote:
I cannot use it because of the way that query is generated
(by hibernate).
The (simplyfied) base query is just
SELECT b.id from box
the subquery
(SELECT m1.id FROM message m1
LEFT JOIN message m2
ON (m1.box_id = m2.box_id AND m1.id m2.id )
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
So, the challenge is this: I'd like to see repeatable test cases
that demonstrate regular performance gains 20%. Double bonus
points for cases that show gains
Sorry,
SELECT MAX(e.id) FROM event_message e WHERE e.box_id = id
as posted previously should actually read
SELECT max(m1.id) FROM message m1 WHERE m1.box_id = b.id)
so I tried this already.
Regards,
panam
--
View this message in context:
2011/5/26 panam pa...@gmx.net:
Hi all,
Cédric Villemain-3 wrote:
without explaining further why the antijoin has bad performance
without cluster, I wonder why you don't use this query :
SELECT b.id,
max(m.id)
FROM box b, message m
WHERE m.box_id = b.id
GROUP BY
Working on some optimization as well as finally getting off my
backside and moving us to 64bit (32gb+memory).
I was reading and at some point it appears on freeBSD the Postgres
block size was upped to 16kb, from 8kb. And on my fedora systems I
believe the default build is 8kb.
When we were
On 26/05/11 20:31, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
Would HT have any impact to the I/O performance (postgresql, and fs in
general) ?.
There have been previous discussions on this list about HT on vs off (I
can't recall what the consensus, if any about what the cause of any
performance difference
Merlin Moncure wrote:
So, the challenge is this: I'd like to see repeatable test cases that
demonstrate regular performance gains 20%. Double bonus points for
cases that show gains 50%.
Do I run around challenging your suggestions and giving you homework?
You have no idea how much eye
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
You can interrogate the config of the card and the raid 10 array using
the megaraid cli package - you need to read the (frankly terrible)
manual to discover which switches to use to determine battery and
cache status etc. If you email me privately I'll get you a link to
On 27/05/11 11:19, Greg Smith wrote:
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
You can interrogate the config of the card and the raid 10 array
using the megaraid cli package - you need to read the (frankly
terrible) manual to discover which switches to use to determine
battery and cache status etc. If you email
On 27/05/11 11:22, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 27/05/11 11:19, Greg Smith wrote:
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
You can interrogate the config of the card and the raid 10 array
using the megaraid cli package - you need to read the (frankly
terrible) manual to discover which switches to use to determine
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
As for figuring out how this impacts more complicated cases, I hear
somebody wrote a book or something that went into pages and pages of detail
about all this. You might want to check it out.
I was just going to
On 05/27/2011 02:13 AM, Cédric Villemain wrote:
I am not an hibernate expert, but I'll surprised if you can not drive
hibernate to do what you want.
If nothing else, you can do a native query in hand-written SQL through
Hibernate. ORMs are useful tools for some jobs, but it's good to be able
Hi.
First extremely thanks for your works about postgresql .
I wonder that after executing 'vaccumdb -z' some other process can not
read their own msg queue during 2 ~ 3 minuts.
vaccum executed every hour. and The processes have not any relations between
postgreql.
Is it possible ?
On 27/05/2011 9:58 AM, Junghwe Kim wrote:
Hi.
First extremely thanks for your works about postgresql .
I wonder that after executing 'vaccumdb -z' some other process can not
read their own msg queue during 2 ~ 3 minuts.
The most likely cause is checkpoint activity. Enable checkpoint
32 matches
Mail list logo
