From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Jarvis <thangalin@gmail.com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Random Page Cost and Planner
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 20:24:23 -0400
Message-ID: <2008.1274833463@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin-j4SACaMeJCH4r5ekEWrtuiFqU56gVM1_lIyV@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikS_QvlkYfv5_hbsXFH4SsTh1nP_WoTwRqpUUcz@mail.gmail.com>
<4BFBD0890200002500031A6E@gw.wicourts.gov>
<AANLkTin-j4SACaMeJCH4r5ekEWrtuiFqU56gVM1_lIyV@mail.gmail.com>
David Jarvis <thangalin@gmail.com> writes:
>> It sounds as though the active portion of your database is pretty
>> much cached in RAM. True?
> I would not have thought so; there are seven tables, each with 39 to 43
> million rows as: [ perhaps 64 bytes per row ]
> The machine has 4GB of RAM, donated to PG as follows:
Well, the thing you need to be *really* wary of is setting the cost
parameters to make isolated tests look good. When you repeat a
particular test case multiple times, all times after the first probably
are fully cached ... but if your DB doesn't actually fit in RAM, that
might not be too representative of what will happen under load.
So if you want to cut the xxx_page_cost settings some more, pay close
attention to what happens to average response time.
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, thangalin@gmail.com, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov
Subject: Re: Random Page Cost and Planner
In-Reply-To: <2008.1274833463@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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