Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z3W40-0004SI-JR for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:00:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z3W3z-0003vi-Cb for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:00:31 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z3W3y-0003vc-CL for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:00:30 +0000 Received: from lists.commandprompt.com ([69.168.55.30]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Z3W3u-0004Ae-Mf for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:00:28 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.3] (spinlock.commandprompt.com [69.168.55.30]) by lists.commandprompt.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3E7AC375; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 14:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.3] ([67.168.169.165] helo=[192.168.1.3]) by assp.commandprompt.com with ESMTPS(AES128-SHA) (2.1.1); 12 Jun 2015 14:00:23 -0700 Message-ID: <557B486C.1030207@commandprompt.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 14:00:28 -0700 From: "Joshua D. Drake" Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Nolan , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Are there tuning parameters that don't take effect immediately? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Assp-Version: 2.1.1(11364) on assp.commandprompt.com X-Assp-Client-SSL: yes X-Assp-ID: assp.commandprompt.com m1-42824-08174 X-Assp-Envelope-From: jd@commandprompt.com X-Assp-Intended-For: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org X-Assp-Original-Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Are there tuning parameters that don't take effectimmediately? X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org On 06/12/2015 01:37 PM, Michael Nolan wrote: > Last night I was doing some tuning on a database The longest query I > was running was taking around 160 seconds. I didn't see much change in > the running time for that query, even after restarting PG. > > Today, with roughly the same system load (possibly even a bit heavier > load), that query is running about 40 seconds. Sounds like some of the relations are cached versus not. JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance