- Alan McKay alan.mc...@gmail.com escreveu:
CentOS / PostgreSQL shop over here.
Our system
IBM 3650 - quad 2Ghz e5405 Xeon
8K SAS RAID Controller
6 x 300G 15K/RPM SAS Drives
/dev/sda - 2 drives configured as a RAID 1 for 300G for the OS
/dev/sdb - 3 drives configured as RAID5 for 600G
- Alan McKay alan.mc...@gmail.com escreveu:
Hmmm. Anyone out there have the Continuent solution working with PostgreSQL?
If so, what release? We're at 8.3 right now.
I have tested Sequoia 2.10.10 with a high transaction rate database with good
servers and plenty of memory. Since that's
- Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com escreveu:
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Fabrix fabrix...@gmail.com wrote:
HI.
Someone had some experience of bad performance with postgres in some server
with many processors?
I had.
but I have experienced problems with another
I would ask for your kernel version. uname -a please?
sure, and thanks for you answer Flavio...
uname -a
Linux SERVIDOR-A 2.6.18-92.el5 #1 SMP Tue Apr 29 13:16:15 EDT 2008 x86_64
x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
cat /etc/redhat-release
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.2
- Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com escreveu:
Oh my lord, that is a foot gun waiting to go off. Assuming 2k
connections, and somehow a fair number of them went active with big
sorts, you'd be able to exhaust all physical memory with about 8 to
16 connections. Lower work_mem now. To
Hello all
In a dedicated server with 16 cores and 16GB of RAM running PostgreSQL 8.2.5 we
have a database with basically two kinds of transactions:
- short transactions with a couple of updates and inserts that runs all the
day;
- batch data loads with hundreds of inserts that runs several
