random_page_cost = 0.5
Not likely. The lowest this value should ever be is 1, and thats if
you're using something like a ram drive.
If you're drives are doing a ton of extra random IO due to the above
(rather than sequential reads) it would lower the throughput quite a
bit.
Try a value of 2
Neil,
Actually, the manual is correct: in 7.4 and earlier releases, enabling
wal_debug can be done without also setting a compile-time #ifdef. As
of current CVS HEAD, the WAL_DEBUG #ifdef must be defined before this
variable is available.
Hmmm. I was told that it was this way for 7.4 as
Josh Berkus wrote:
Hmmm. I was told that it was this way for 7.4 as well; that's why it's in
the docs that way.
No such statement is made in the docs AFAIK: they merely say If
nonzero, turn on WAL-related debugging output.
I invented a new #ifdef symbol when making this change in CVS HEAD, so
Neil Conway
Simon Riggs wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote
Simon Riggs wrote
Please set WAL_DEBUG to 1 so we can see a bit more info: thanks.
I'm pretty sure that WAL_DEBUG requires a compile-time option.
I'm surprised, but you are right, the manual does SAY this requires
a
compile time
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The behaviour I wish to add is:
Keep wal_debug as a value between 0 and 16.
If =0 then no debug output (default).
Use following bitmasks against the value
Mask 1 = XLOG Checkpoints get logged
Mask 2 = Archive API calls get logged
Mask 4 = Transaction -
Simon Riggs wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote
Simon Riggs wrote
Please set WAL_DEBUG to 1 so we can see a bit more info: thanks.
I'm pretty sure that WAL_DEBUG requires a compile-time option.
I'm surprised, but you are right, the manual does SAY this requires a
compile time option; it is unfortunately not
Further update to my WAL experimentation. pg_xlog files have increased
to 81, and checking today up to 84. Currently nothing much going on with
the server save a background process running a select every 30 seconds
with almost no impact (according to IO from vmstats).
This in itself is a good
Rob Fielding wrote:
My focus today has been on WAL - I've not looked at WAL before. By
increasing the settings thus :
wal_buffers = 64 # need to determin WAL usage
wal_files = 64 # range 0-64
wal_sync_method = fsync # the default varies across platforms:
wal_debug = 0 # range
Simon,
Please set WAL_DEBUG to 1 so we can see a bit more info: thanks.
I'm pretty sure that WAL_DEBUG requires a compile-time option.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched
Hi,
There alot here, so skip to the middle from my WAL settings if you like.
I'm currently investigating the performance on a large database which
consumes email designated as SPAM for the perusal of customers wishing
to check. This incorporates a number of subprocesses - several delivery
Rob
Sir - I have to congratulate you on having the most coherently summarised and
yet complex list query I have ever seen.
I fear that I will be learning from this problem rather than helping, but one
thing did puzzle me - you've set your random_page_cost to 0.5? I'm not sure
this is
11 matches
Mail list logo
