Mark Mielke mark 'at' mark.mielke.cc writes:
On 07/06/2009 01:48 AM, Saurabh Dave wrote:
We are bundling PostgreSQL 8.3.7 with our Java based application.
[...]
PostgreSQL 8.4 comes with significantly improved out of the box
configuration. I think that is what you are looking for.
No offense intended - but have you looked at the documentation for
postgresql.conf?
If you are going to include PostgreSQL in your application, I'd highly
recommend you understand what you are including. :-)
I had a look into the documentation of postgres.conf, and tried a lot with
changing
On 07/06/2009 03:17 AM, Saurabh Dave wrote:
No offense intended - but have you looked at the documentation for
postgresql.conf?
If you are going to include PostgreSQL in your application, I'd
highly recommend you understand what you are including. :-)
I had a look into the documentation of
On 7/5/09 11:13 PM, Mark Kirkwood mar...@paradise.net.nz wrote:
Craig Ringer wrote:
On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 11:51 -0700, Patvs wrote:
With 4 regular harddisks in RAID0 you get great read/write speeds, but the
SSDs excel in IO/s and a 0.1ms access time.
... but are often really,
On 7/6/09 1:43 AM, Scott Carey sc...@richrelevance.com wrote:
On 7/5/09 11:13 PM, Mark Kirkwood mar...@paradise.net.nz wrote:
Craig Ringer wrote:
On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 11:51 -0700, Patvs wrote:
There is no reason to go RAID 1 with SSD's if this is an end-user box and
the data is
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Patvspa...@chello.nl wrote:
-4 One a scale from 1 to 10, how significant are the following on
performance increase:
-[ ] Getting a faster harddisk (RAID or a SSD)
-[ ] Getting a faster CPU
-[ ] Upgrading PostgreSQL (8.2 and 8.3) to 8.4
-[ ] Tweaking PostgreSQL
* Craig Ringer (cr...@postnewspapers.com.au) wrote:
What that does mean, though, is that if you don't have significantly
more RAM than a 32-bit machine can address (say, 6 to 8 GB), you should
stick with 32-bit binaries.
I'm not sure this is always true since on the amd64/em64t platforms
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Greg Smithgsm...@gregsmith.com wrote:
6) Normally to change the locale you have to shutdown the database, delete
its data directory, and then run the initdb command with appropriate
options to use an alternate locale. I thought the one-click installer
handled
On 07/06/2009 06:23 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Craig Ringer (cr...@postnewspapers.com.au) wrote:
What that does mean, though, is that if you don't have significantly
more RAM than a 32-bit machine can address (say, 6 to 8 GB), you should
stick with 32-bit binaries.
I'm not sure this
Saurabh Dave wrote:
No offense intended - but have you looked at the
documentation for postgresql.conf?
If you are going to include PostgreSQL in your application, I'd
highly recommend you understand what you are including. :-)
I
had a look into the documentation of postgres.conf,
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 15:27 -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
Even if you only have 4 GB of RAM, the 32-bit kernel needs to fight
with low memory vs high memory, whereas 64-bit has a clean address
space.
That's a good point. The cutoff is probably closer to 2G or at most 3G.
Certainly it's madness to
Thanks all for your valuable comments, as I gather, what I need to do is to
check the queries that are slow and do a vacuum analyze and share the
results along with postgresql.conf being used.
I will work on that.
Thanks again,
Saurabh
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:46 AM, justin
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Craig
Ringercr...@postnewspapers.com.au wrote:
Personally, I'd probably go 64-bit on any reasonably modern machine that
could be expected to have more than 2 or 3 GB of RAM. Then again, I
can't imagine willingly building a production database server for any
13 matches
Mail list logo
