From: Jeffrey W. Baker <jwbaker@acm.org>
To: Steve Poe <spoe@sfnet.cc>
Cc: paul@oxton.com
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SPAM?] Re: PG8 Tuning
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 09:58:44 -0700
Message-ID: <1123779524.6664.1.camel@toonses.gghcwest.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1123836428.19976.26.camel@amd64-laptop-spoe>
References: <1536.217.45.209.171.1123763001.squirrel@www.gradwell.com>
<1123836428.19976.26.camel@amd64-laptop-spoe>
On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 08:47 +0000, Steve Poe wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Before I say anything else, one online document which may be of
> assistance to you is:
> http://www.powerpostgresql.com/PerfList/
>
> Some thoughts I have:
>
> 3) You're shared RAM setting seems overkill to me. Part of the challenge
> is you're going from 1000 to 262K with no assessment in between. Each
> situation can be different, but try in the range of 10 - 50K.
>
> 4) pg_xlog: If you're pg_xlog is on a spindle is *only* for pg_xlog
> you're better off.
Like Mr. Stone said earlier, this is pure dogma. In my experience,
xlogs on the same volume with data is much faster if both are on
battery-backed write-back RAID controller memory. Moving from this
situation to xlogs on a single normal disk is going to be much slower in
most cases.
-jwb
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: jwbaker@acm.org, spoe@sfnet.cc, paul@oxton.com
Subject: Re: [SPAM?] Re: PG8 Tuning
In-Reply-To: <1123779524.6664.1.camel@toonses.gghcwest.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox