Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6808B9FB279 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 00:35:05 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64839-06 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 03:34:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B3B9FB2ED for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 00:34:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id BC98C56459; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 22:34:52 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Wed, 25 Oct 2006 22:34:48 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 22:34:48 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Worky Workerson Cc: Merlin Moncure , Markus Schaber , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Best COPY Performance Message-ID: <20061026033448.GC26892@nasby.net> References: <453C8B0D.4070803@logix-tt.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p10 amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Hashcash: 1:20:061026:worky.workerson@gmail.com::FxIUVoOk9uKq5yPx:000000000000 0000000000000000000000001dqP X-Hashcash: 1:20:061026:mmoncure@gmail.com::AhKB1wmbfFAcOgom:0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000003MA2 X-Hashcash: 1:20:061026:schabi@logix-tt.com::yfCKBlf094OAEBQg:000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000005wLL X-Hashcash: 1:20:061026:pgsql-performance@postgresql.org::GUqEkqtMkS57Z9td:00000 0000000000000000000000006rVx X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/542 X-Sequence-Number: 21671 On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 11:25:01AM -0400, Worky Workerson wrote: > >I'm guessing the high bursts are checkpoints. Can you check your log > >files for pg and see if you are getting warnings about checkpoint > >frequency? You can get some mileage here by increasing wal files. > > Nope, nothing in the log. I have set: > wal_buffers=128 > checkpoint_segments=128 > checkpoint_timeout=3000 > which I thought was rather generous. Perhaps I should set it even > higher for the loads? But depending on your shared_buffer and bgwriter settings (as well as how much WAL traffic you're generating, you could still end up with big slugs of work to be done when checkpoints happen. If you set checkpoint_warning to 3001, you'll see exactly when checkpoints are happening, so you can determine if that's an issue. -- Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)