Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BAFD6334E1 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:24:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 79967-07 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:24:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com (mail-gy0-f174.google.com [209.85.160.174]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8574E632F34 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:24:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: by gyg13 with SMTP id 13so3355336gyg.19 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 12:24:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Lun120TNEFH+8a0ika9NMQvBnyYZtycaBknx9uO74sM=; b=nfltVt3ed05aNOzK+QhkNO06dJz2Y0+uQdrfdlh+cC6ZNGKo2g4E3ttPTNZBq7KLGz uNyfVcMerXhiAtlSe/4t9yGhFyTZm/BaMjwfL1TDJmm0nciIyh3iD0CPoPbkhaDGyMVT Q0lTJ/1fLhT472nfpyfyJVF7ep36AfVQmHhco= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=T8bEGuJHrqcNF6x4doEm9/sAhac8xtE5v8TIDJddInaOYNptku3JzmrfcvqFM3QY1Z Ob952O0FwwNnt1iZVdwV5QZ0EUoHsh9WdIeJ3yEH9YCCYZBCbTggdXwjgS6KGZ74xVg4 yYNrUpgcBe2P4bXtsU6qfc/Rd+C9ySywWI/Uw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.218.9 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 12:24:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100420182832.GB53489@mr-paradox.net> References: <20100420173936.GA50886@mr-paradox.net> <20100420180351.GA51940@mr-paradox.net> <20100420182030.GA53489@mr-paradox.net> <20100420182832.GB53489@mr-paradox.net> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:24:34 -0600 Received: by 10.150.209.11 with SMTP id h11mr7736887ybg.198.1271791474696; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 12:24:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: Very high effective_cache_size == worse performance? From: Scott Marlowe To: David Kerr Cc: Nikolas Everett , Robert Haas , 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=-2.079 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=-0.179, BAYES_00=-1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201004/260 X-Sequence-Number: 38510 On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:28 PM, David Kerr wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:23:51PM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote: > - So are you logging to the same drive that has pg_xlog and your > - data/base directory on this machine? > - > > the db, xlog and logs are all on separate areas of the SAN. > > separate I/O controllers, etc on the SAN. it's setup well, I wouldn't expect > contention there. Same xkb/s gigabit connection?