From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Jeff Boes <jboes@nexcerpt.com>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Performance on temp table inserts
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:04:58 -0700
Message-ID: <200305191504.58368.josh@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <baba9i$2vi8$1@news.hub.org>
References: <baba9i$2vi8$1@news.hub.org>
Jeff,
> Box #1 is our "production" server, and actually has more going on during
> the day than #2 which is the "test" server. #1 has "shared_buffers" set
> to 131072; #2 has it at 250000. Hardware, O/S and PostgreSQL versions are
> all identical. Software executing the query (Perl code using DBI) is the
> same.
First, I think you need to join the PGSQL-PERFORMANCE list; we discuss things
like your issue all the time there.
Collective wisdom on that list is that shared_buffer settings above 5000-6000
actually degrade performance by robbing the kernel buffer of resources. The
postgres shared_buffers are just a "holding area" for operations spooling to
the kernel buffer which actually does most of the work.
HTH.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, jboes@nexcerpt.com
Subject: Re: Performance on temp table inserts
In-Reply-To: <200305191504.58368.josh@agliodbs.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox