On Mon, 2004-07-26 at 08:20, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Hervà Piedvache wrote:
SNIP
> > sort_mem = 512000
>
> This is too much, you are instructing Postgres to use 512MB
> for each backend ( some time each backend can use this quantity
> more then one )
agreed. If any one process needs this mu
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
Josh,
Le mardi 13 Juillet 2004 19:10, Josh Berkus a écrit :
What can I do to get better results ?? (configuration option, and/or
hardware update ?)
What can I give you to get more important informations to help me ?
1) What PostgreSQL version are you using?
v7.4.3
2) What's
Josh Berkus wrote:
Herve'
I forgot to ask about your hardware. How much RAM, and what's your disk
setup? CPU?
sort_mem = 512000
Huh? Sort_mem is in K. The above says that you've allocated 512MB sort
mem. Is this process the *only* thing going on on the machine?
And also is not system
Herve'
> Hum ... it's only for speed aspect ... I was using postgresql with this
> option since 7.01 ... and for me fsync=on was so slow ...
> Is it really no time consuming for the system to bring it ON now with
> v7.4.3 ??
Well, I wouldn't do it until you've figured out the current performance
Josh,
Le jeudi 15 Juillet 2004 20:09, Josh Berkus a écrit :
> > I suggest you check this first. Check the performance tuning guide..
> >
> > http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/index.php
> >
> > That is a starters. As Josh suggested, increase checkpoint segments if
> > you
>
> have
Shridhar,
> I suggest you check this first. Check the performance tuning guide..
>
> http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/index.php
>
> That is a starters. As Josh suggested, increase checkpoint segments if you
have
> disk space. Correspondingly WAL disk space requirements go up
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
Josh,
Le mercredi 14 Juillet 2004 18:28, Josh Berkus a écrit :
checkpoint_segments = 3
You should probably increase this if you have the disk space. For massive
insert operations, I've found it useful to have as much as 128 segments
(although this means about 1.5GB disk spac
Josh,
Le mercredi 14 Juillet 2004 18:28, Josh Berkus a écrit :
>
> > checkpoint_segments = 3
>
> You should probably increase this if you have the disk space. For massive
> insert operations, I've found it useful to have as much as 128 segments
> (although this means about 1.5GB disk space)
Othe
Josh,
Le mercredi 14 Juillet 2004 18:28, Josh Berkus a écrit :
>
> I forgot to ask about your hardware. How much RAM, and what's your disk
> setup? CPU?
8 Gb of RAM
Bi - Intel Xeon 2.00GHz
Hard drive in SCSI RAID 5
/dev/sdb6 101G 87G 8.7G 91% /usr/local/pgsql/data
/dev/sda7
Herve'
I forgot to ask about your hardware. How much RAM, and what's your disk
setup? CPU?
> sort_mem = 512000
Huh? Sort_mem is in K. The above says that you've allocated 512MB sort
mem. Is this process the *only* thing going on on the machine?
> vacuum_mem = 409600
Again, 409.6MB
Hervé Piedvache wrote:
In my case it's a PostgreSQL dedicated server ...
effective_cache_size = 500
For me I give to the planner the information that the kernel is able to cache
500 disk page in RAM
That is what? 38GB of RAM?
free
total used free sharedb
Le mercredi 14 Juillet 2004 12:13, Shridhar Daithankar a écrit :
> gnari wrote:
> > is there a recommended procedure to estimate
> > the best value for effective_cache_size on a
> > dedicated DB server ?
>
> Rule of thumb(On linux): on a typically loaded machine, observe cache
> memory of the machi
gnari wrote:
is there a recommended procedure to estimate
the best value for effective_cache_size on a
dedicated DB server ?
Rule of thumb(On linux): on a typically loaded machine, observe cache memory of
the machine and allocate good chunk of it as effective cache.
To define good chunck of it, y
From: "Hervé Piedvache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 11:42 PM
> effective_cache_size = 500
looks like madness to me.
my (modest) understanding of this, is that
you are telling postgres to assume a 40Gb disk
cache (correct me if I am wrong).
btw, how much effect does thi
Josh,
Le mardi 13 Juillet 2004 19:10, Josh Berkus a écrit :
>
> > What can I do to get better results ?? (configuration option, and/or
> > hardware update ?)
> > What can I give you to get more important informations to help me ?
>
> 1) What PostgreSQL version are you using?
v7.4.3
> 2) What's y
Herve,
> What can I do to get better results ?? (configuration option, and/or
> hardware update ?)
> What can I give you to get more important informations to help me ?
1) What PostgreSQL version are you using?
2) What's your VACUUM, ANALYZE, VACUUM FULL, REINDEX schedule?
3) Can you list the n
Hi,
I have a database with 10 tables having about 50 000 000 records ...
Every day I have to delete about 20 000 records, inserting about the same in
one of this table.
Then I make some agregations inside the other tables to get some week results,
and globals result by users. That mean about 18
17 matches
Mail list logo
