From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: wal_buffer tests in
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 14:57:10 -0700
Message-ID: <200507281457.10637.josh@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87oe8n881i.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
References: <200507271330.02083.josh@agliodbs.com>
<87oe8n881i.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
Greg,
> You have wal_buffer set to 2048? That's pretty radical compared to the
> default of just 5. Your tests shows you had to go to this large a value
> to see the maximum effect?
No, take a look at the graph. It looks like we got the maximum effect
from a wal_buffers somewhere between 64 and 256. On the DBT2 runs, any
variation less than 5% is just noise.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
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: josh@agliodbs.com, gsstark@mit.edu, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: wal_buffer tests in
In-Reply-To: <200507281457.10637.josh@agliodbs.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