Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6957DB5DBEA for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 08:15:20 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 77144-04 for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:15:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qw0-f46.google.com (mail-qw0-f46.google.com [209.85.216.46]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 586D8B5DBDE for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 08:15:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: by qwk3 with SMTP id 3so2597289qwk.19 for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 04:15:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=X3sTlF6K+Su+pTbgYsKeJ3CfL8vcoBg5E/SGsP1+X9M=; b=ufiyk7zhQwooqx4oWoT6JDWW4Yv653GdWuF5gr/v8uXlz5jGhMvdikHRQGIDs95T/f tkiEEqZjIm49SvN6lgvtymDk1ixkxuttx+m6475GFxd30s5UhHsc4W3ldklJHUxadyle bEGiNWijYPkwAF9jd7m2D7dVyXCA1p1FccDRc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.133.141 with SMTP id f13mr664525qct.135.1313925307929; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 04:15:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.181.70 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 04:15:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <926B03B309E841C088AAB67FD80A2B84@BERNICE> References: <926B03B309E841C088AAB67FD80A2B84@BERNICE> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 13:15:07 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: settings input for upgrade From: Robert Klemme To: Midge Brown Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.899 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201108/240 X-Sequence-Number: 44687 On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Midge Brown wrote: > Robert, > > I was largely looking for input on whether I may have inadvertently shot > myself in the foot with some of the choices I made when setting up > postgresql 9.0, which is on different hardware than was the 7.4 setup. OK, I though the config change was the diff for the other two database and not for 9.0. > The splitting of one table to two separate databases was done on 7.4 and did > make a positive change in write performance. I was including that > information only in an attempt to provide as much detail as possible. Good to know! Thanks! Kind regards robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/