[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ file /usr/lib/postgresql/8.1/bin/postgres
/usr/lib/postgresql/8.1/bin/postgres: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, AMD x86-64,
version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.0, dynamically linked (uses shared libs),
stripped
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 18:56:32 +0100
11 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On 2006-03-17, at 15:50, Evgeny Gridasov wrote:
template1=# select version();
version
--
---
PostgreSQL 8.1.3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC)
3.
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 08:56:58AM -0800, Steve Atkins wrote:
> 64 bit binaries usually run marginally slower than 32 bit binaries.
This depends a bit on the application, and what you mean by "64 bit" (ie.
what architecture). Some specialized applications actually benefit from
having a 64-bit nati
On Mar 17, 2006, at 4:24 AM, Evgeny Gridasov wrote:
Yesterday we recieved a new server 2xAMD64(2core x 2chips = 4 cores)
8GB RAM and RAID-1 (LSI megaraid)
I've maid some tests with pgbench (scaling 1000, database size ~ 16Gb)
First of all, I'd like to mention that it was strange to see that
th
>>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 6:24 am, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Evgeny Gridasov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've maid some tests with pgbench
If possible, tune the background writer with your actual application
code under normal load. Optimal tuning is going to vary based on usage
pat
I got this :
template1=# select version();
version
--
PostgreSQL 8.1.2 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,
template1=# select version();
version
-
PostgreSQL 8.1.3 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 3.3.5
(Debia
First of all, I'd like to mention that it was strange to see that
the server performance degraded by 1-2% when we changed kernel/userland
to x86_64
from default installed i386 userland/amd64 kernel. The operating system
was Debian Linux,
filesystem ext3.
Did you use postgres compiled for
Yesterday we recieved a new server 2xAMD64(2core x 2chips = 4 cores)
8GB RAM and RAID-1 (LSI megaraid)
I've maid some tests with pgbench (scaling 1000, database size ~ 16Gb)
First of all, I'd like to mention that it was strange to see that
the server performance degraded by 1-2% when we changed ke
>>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:15 pm, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Evgeny Gridasov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> please, could you post other settings from your postgresql.conf?
Everything in postgresql.conf which is not commented out:
listen_addresses = '*' # what IP interface(s)
Kevin,
please, could you post other settings from your postgresql.conf?
interested in:
bgwriter_delay
shared_buffers
checkpoint_segments
checkpoint_timeout
wal_buffers
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 13:43:45 -0600
"Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We were seeing clusters of query timeouts wi
>>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 1:54 pm, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joshua D. Drake"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I then did some calculations, based on the sustained write speed of
our
>> drive array (as measured by copying big files to it), and we tried
>> this:
>>
>> bgwriter_lru_percent =
> I then did some calculations, based on the sustained write speed of our
> drive array (as measured by copying big files to it), and we tried
> this:
>
> bgwriter_lru_percent = 20.0
> bgwriter_lru_maxpages = 200
> bgwriter_all_percent = 10.0
> bgwriter_all_maxpages = 600
>
> This almost totally e
13 matches
Mail list logo
