I've been using the adaptec ZCR raid cards in our servers for a while
now, mostly small systems with 3 or 6 disks, and we've been very happy
with them. However, we're building a new DB machine with 14 U320 15K
SCA drives, and we've run into a performance bottlenkeck with the ZCR
card where i
pg_autovacuum is a daemon, not something that get's run twice a day.
I think that's what the question Matthew was getting @. I'm not sure
what would happen to performance if pg_autovacuum was launched twice a
day from cron, but you could end up in an ugly situation if it starts
up.
--brian
Jason,,
One suggestion i have, stay away from adaptec ZCR RAID products, we've
been doing testing on them, and they don't perform well at all.
--brian
On Aug 11, 2004, at 1:08 PM, Jason Coene wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback. To clear it up, we are definitely not CPU
bound at the moment. Any
On Aug 11, 2004, at 3:18 PM, Jason Coene wrote:
I'm wondering why our PG server is using so little memory... The
system has
2GB of memory, though only around 200MB of it are used. Is there a PG
setting to force more memory usage towards the cache? Additionally,
we use
FreeBSD. I've heard that
I have a query that fetches information from a log, based on an indexed column. The timestamp in the table is with time zone, and the server time zone is not GMT. However, i want all of the timestamps for a particular day in GMT. If i simply use a date constant, the index is used, but the incor
On Dec 1, 2004, at 1:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
That seems like the hard way to express a timestamp constant. Why not
I realized after i sent this message that i might get this responese. I should have mentioned this was from within a stored pl/pgsql function, and the date wasn't a constant, but a
I'm curious how many of the configuration values can be determined
automatically, or with the help of some script. It seem like there
could be some perl script in contrib that could help figure this out.
Possibly you are asked a bunch of questions and then the values are
computed based on tha
it seems like the difference is probably related to caching. you say
you have 1gb of ram, and the database is 2gb.Obviously the entire
database isn't cached, but maybe your query runs fast when the table is
in memory, and they it gets swapped out of cache because some other
piece of infor
