From: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
To: David Kerr <dmk@mr-paradox.net>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Very high effective_cache_size == worse performance?
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:41:36 -0700
Message-ID: <1271785296.25602.8.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100420173936.GA50886@mr-paradox.net>
References: <20100420173936.GA50886@mr-paradox.net>
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 10:39 -0700, David Kerr wrote:
> Howdy all,
>
> I've got a huge server running just postgres. It's got 48 cores and 256GB of ram. Redhat 5.4, Postgres 8.3.9.
> 64bit OS. No users currently.
>
> I've got a J2EE app that loads data into the DB, it's got logic behind it so it's not a simple bulk load, so
> i don't think we can use copy.
>
> Based on the tuning guides, it set my effective_cache_size to 128GB (1/2 the available memory) on the box.
>
> When I ran my load, it took aproximately 15 hours to do load 20 million records. I thought this was odd because
> on a much smaller machine I was able to do that same amount of records in 6 hours.
>
> My initial thought was hardware issues so we got sar, vmstat, etc all running on the box and they didn't give
> any indication that we had resource issues.
>
> So I decided to just make the 2 PG config files look the same. (the only change was dropping effective_cache_size
> from 128GB to 2GB).
>
> Now the large box performs the same as the smaller box. (which is fine).
>
> incidentally, both tests were starting from a blank database.
>
> Is this expected?
Without a more complete picture of the configuration, this post doesn't
mean a whole lot. Further, effective_cash_size is not likely to effect a
bulk load at all.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Thanks!
>
> Dave
>
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
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: jd@commandprompt.com, dmk@mr-paradox.net
Subject: Re: Very high effective_cache_size == worse performance?
In-Reply-To: <1271785296.25602.8.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.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