On Dec 17, 2003, at 11:57 AM, Nick Fankhauser wrote:
Hi-
After having done my best to squeeze better performance out of our
application by tuning within our existing resources, I'm falling back
on
adding memory as a short-term solution while we get creative for a
long-term
fix. I'm curious abou
d'oh, just realized what you're telling me here. /me smacks forehead.
Let's try effective_cache of 183105... (75%). Starting both servers,
waiting for big fetch to start, and...
procs memoryswap io
system cpu
r b w swpd free buff cache si so
IO is active, but hardly saturated. CPU load is hefty though, load
average is at 4 now.
procs memoryswap io
system cpu
r b w swpd free buff cache si sobibo incs
us sy id
0 2 1 2808 11432 39616 1902984 0 0 204
On Dec 4, 2003, at 10:11 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:57:38AM -0800, Dror Matalon wrote:
I've seen this comment several times from different people.
Would someone care to explain how you would get data corruption? I
thought that the whole idea of the log is to provide a jo
Sean
Second and more radical, has anyone run postgreSQL on the new Apple
G5 with an XRaid system? This seems like a great value combination.
Fast CPU, wide bus, Fibre Channel IO, 2.5TB all for ~17k.
I keep see references to terabyte postgreSQL installations, I was
wondering if anyone on thi
