X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9510D53492 for ; Fri, 13 May 2005 13:12:23 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 69049-01 for ; Fri, 13 May 2005 16:12:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no (cassarossa.samfundet.no [129.241.93.19]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74F565331C for ; Fri, 13 May 2005 13:12:16 -0300 (ADT) Received: from trofast.sesse.net ([129.241.93.32]) by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DWclq-0008SG-BG for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 13 May 2005 18:12:14 +0200 Received: from sesse by trofast.sesse.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DWclq-0007VH-00 for ; Fri, 13 May 2005 18:12:14 +0200 Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 18:12:14 +0200 From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PostgreSQL strugling during high load Message-ID: <20050513161214.GD28043@uio.no> Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org References: <01cc01c557ba$a4fdb0b0$f20214ac@bite.lt> <23217.1115991763@sss.pgh.pa.us> <022901c557c5$73df1220$f20214ac@bite.lt> <23517.1115993561@sss.pgh.pa.us> <026b01c557ca$71c5b5c0$f20214ac@bite.lt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <026b01c557ca$71c5b5c0$f20214ac@bite.lt> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.11.8 on a i686 X-Message-Flag: Outlook? --> http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.016 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200505/264 X-Sequence-Number: 12428 On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 05:45:45PM +0300, Mindaugas Riauba wrote: > But there's no checkpoint warnings in serverlog. And btw we are running > with fsync=off (yes I know the consequences). Just a note here; since you have battery-backed hardware cache, you probably won't notice that much of a slowdown with fsync=on. However, you are already pushed, so... :-) /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/