Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE3709FB21A for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:26:48 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 97167-05 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:26:46 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com (nz-out-0102.google.com [64.233.162.196]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B9139FB1E4 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:26:44 -0300 (ADT) Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id i11so137305nzi for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 09:26:42 -0700 (PDT) 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=YdWSZoOJXe+fEeM19rl+BG6RCD69nOzuo7TUzOCQK1D2lWE4ODGBOtM3Ffq802DGFU6Xrb7Pl7fmA6z8GXckw+sL4DRwO86MnbCLNZoNozLdej/KvuisZCreQIghTbOdL18+sIb2dQL4MS6Fxe9eRQzgFrvdnivtWYnOFLKIAaU= Received: by 10.35.96.7 with SMTP id y7mr1261040pyl; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:25:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.53.3 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:25:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 11:25:01 -0400 From: "Worky Workerson" To: "Merlin Moncure" Subject: Re: Best COPY Performance Cc: "Markus Schaber" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <453C8B0D.4070803@logix-tt.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.282 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/520 X-Sequence-Number: 21649 > I'm guessing the high bursts are checkpoints. Can you check your log > files for pg and see if you are getting warnings about checkpoint > frequency? You can get some mileage here by increasing wal files. Nope, nothing in the log. I have set: wal_buffers=128 checkpoint_segments=128 checkpoint_timeout=3000 which I thought was rather generous. Perhaps I should set it even higher for the loads? > Have you determined that pg is not swapping? try upping maintenance_work_mem. maintenance_work_mem = 524288 ... should I increase it even more? Doesn't look like pg is swapping ... > What exactly is your architecture? is your database server direct > attached to the san? if so, 2gb/4gb fc? what san? have you bonnie++ > the san? basically, you can measure iowait to see if pg is waiting on > your disks. I'm currently running bonnie++ with the defaults ... should I change the execution to better mimic Postgres' behavior? RHEL 4.3 x86_64 HP DL585, 4 Dual Core Opteron 885s 16 GB RAM 2x300GB 10K SCSI320, RAID10 HP MSA1000 SAN direct connected via single 2GB Fibre Channel Arbitrated Loop 10x300GB 10K SCSI320, RAID10