Re: [PERFORM] Postgres Benchmark Results

2007-05-28 Thread PFC
On Mon, 28 May 2007 05:53:16 +0200, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am re-running it with other tuning, notably cost-based vacuum delay and less frequent checkpoints, and it is a *lot* smoother. These take a full night to run, so I'll post more results when I have usefull stuff to

[PERFORM] PITR performance costs

2007-05-28 Thread Dave Cramer
Since PITR has to enable archiving does this not increase the amount of disk I/O required ? Dave ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Re: [PERFORM] PITR performance costs

2007-05-28 Thread Bill Moran
Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since PITR has to enable archiving does this not increase the amount of disk I/O required ? It does increase the required amount of I/O. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ---(end of broadcast)---

Re: [PERFORM] PITR performance costs

2007-05-28 Thread A. Kretschmer
am Mon, dem 28.05.2007, um 8:45:38 -0400 mailte Dave Cramer folgendes: Since PITR has to enable archiving does this not increase the amount of disk I/O required ? Yes. But you can use a different hard drive for this log. Andreas -- Andreas Kretschmer Kontakt: Heynitz: 035242/47150,

Re: [PERFORM] PITR performance costs

2007-05-28 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Dave Cramer wrote: Since PITR has to enable archiving does this not increase the amount of disk I/O required ? There's no difference in normal DML operations, but some bulk operations like CREATE INDEX that don't otherwise generate WAL, need to be WAL logged when archiving is enabled. --

Re: [PERFORM] PITR performance costs

2007-05-28 Thread Dave Cramer
Heikki, Don't the archived logs have to be copied as well as the regular WAL logs get recycled ? Dave On 28-May-07, at 12:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Dave Cramer wrote: Since PITR has to enable archiving does this not increase the amount of disk I/O required ? There's no

Re: [PERFORM] PITR performance costs

2007-05-28 Thread Stephen Frost
Dave, et al, * Dave Cramer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Don't the archived logs have to be copied as well as the regular WAL logs get recycled ? Yes, but I'd expect at the point they're being copied off to some other store (probably a seperate disk, or even over the network to another system,

Re: [PERFORM] PITR performance costs

2007-05-28 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-05-28 at 08:45 -0400, Dave Cramer wrote: Since PITR has to enable archiving does this not increase the amount of disk I/O required ? As Heikki says, some operations need logging when PITR is on; these are now documented in the performance tips section of the latest dev docs:

Re: [PERFORM] general PG network slowness (possible cure) (repost)

2007-05-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Please let us know if there is something we should change in the PostgreSQL source code. --- Peter T. Breuer wrote: Also sprach Tom Lane: It may still be useful. The kernel won't necessarily send data as you push it