Message-ID: <463CA8B9.4080808@laliluna.de>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 17:54:33 +0200
From: Sebastian Hennebrueder <usenet@laliluna.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070306)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Feature Request --- was: PostgreSQL Performance Tuning
References: 
 <OFC96167D5.6BB63AC2-ON652572C9.003B5263-652572C9.003E4142@lntinfotech.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0705011647360.12033@asgard.lang.hm>
	<463B61ED.20409@laliluna.de> <200705041011.42313.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<463C2FED.8020400@paradise.net.nz>
In-Reply-To: <463C2FED.8020400@paradise.net.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mark Kirkwood schrieb:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Sebastian,
>>
>>> Before inventing a hyper tool, we might consider to provide 3-5 example
>>> szenarios for common hardware configurations. This consumes less time
>>> and be discussed and defined in a couple of days. This is of course not
>>> the correct option for a brandnew 20 spindle Sata 10.000 Raid 10 system
>>> but these are probably not the target for default configurations.
>>
>> That's been suggested a number of times, but some GUCs are really
>> tied to the *exact* amount of RAM you have available.  So I've never
>> seen how "example configurations" could help.
>>
>
> I'm not convinced about this objection - having samples gives a bit of
> a heads up on *what* knobs you should at least look at changing.
>
> Also it might be helpful on the -general or -perf lists to be able to
> say "try config 3 (or whatever we call 'em) and see what changes..."
>
> I've certainly found the sample config files supplied with that
> database whose name begins with 'M' a useful *start* when I want
> something better than default...
>
> Cheers
>
> Mark
>
Some ideas about szenarios and setting. This is meant as a discussion
proposal, I am by far not a database guru!
The settings do not provide a perfect setup but a more efficient as
compared to default setup.

criterias:
free memory
cpu ? what is the consequence?
separate spindels
total connections
Windows/linux/soloars ?

adapted settings:
max_connections
shared_buffers
effective_cache_size
/work_mem
//maintenance_work_mem

/checkpoint_segments ?
checkpoint_timeout ?
checkpoint_warning ?


Szenario a) 256 MB free memory, one disk or raid where all disks are in
the raid,
max_connections = 40
shared_buffers = 64MB
effective_cache_size = 180 MB
/work_mem = 1 MB
//maintenance_work_mem = 4 MB
/

Szenario b) 1024 MB free memory, one disk or raid where all disks are in
the raid
max_connections = 80
shared_buffers = 128 MB
effective_cache_size = 600 MB
/work_mem = 1,5 MB
//maintenance_work_mem = 16 MB
/
Szenario c) 2048 MB free memory, one disk or raid where all disks are in
the raid
max_connections = 160
shared_buffers = 256 MB
effective_cache_size = 1200 MB
/work_mem = 2 MB
//maintenance_work_mem = 32 MB
/
Szenario d) 2048 MB free memory, raid of multiple discs, second raid or
disk
max_connections = 160
shared_buffers = 256 MB
effective_cache_size = 1200 MB
/work_mem = 2 MB/
/maintenance_work_mem = 32 MB
/WAL on second spindle