X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD4979DCC0E for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 19:29:16 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 23718-02 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 19:29:19 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA78A9DCC68 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 19:29:14 -0400 (AST) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 8so626691nzo for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:29:17 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=igrIKgPjdX6f/CXqlmGNfdpZ3OfsR73JOnH1h4iQHjnCh/gfygFZz8vtX8BSo/9i+3jJNz1GcS85LLvmquHcL9QnSTUej8kh4KShzmVHJLRhncsW5XKClJW0KLLljeQq80Ne02T5q2rbf05W7+PmAq/gJ6wQBde97B7vHgQzZJw= Received: by 10.65.23.16 with SMTP id a16mr584612qbj; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:29:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.216.18 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:29:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:29:17 +0100 From: "Claus Guttesen" To: "Kenji Morishige" Subject: Re: Best OS & Configuration for Dual Xeon w/4GB & Adaptec RAID 2200S Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <20060317221116.GA14661@juniper.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060317221116.GA14661@juniper.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.096 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.096] X-Spam-Score: 0.096 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/297 X-Sequence-Number: 17734 > 4. Are there any other settings in the conf file I could try to tweak? One more thing :-) I stumbled over this setting, this made the db (PG 7.4.9) make use of the index rather than doing a sequential scan and it reduced a query from several minutes to some 20 seconds. random_page_cost =3D 2 (original value was 4). Another thing you ought to do is to to get the four-five most used queries and do an explain analyze in these. Since our website wasn't prepared for this type of statistics I simply did a tcpdump, grep'ed all select's, sorted them and sorted them unique so I could see which queries were used most. regards Claus