Re: Performance Tuning Document?
От | Steve Wolfe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance Tuning Document? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 003d01c1d749$f7f1fbe0$d281f6cc@iboats.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Performance Tuning Document? (Matthew Kirkwood <matthew@hairy.beasts.org>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
> if u imply that you'd better leave huge amounts of memory to the OS buffer > cache rather than give them to the DB buffer cache then I strongly disagree. Good, because that wasn't exactly what I was implying. I was implying that increasing either disk cache or shared buffers to ridiculous limits *at the expense of the other* can potentiall be wasteful and even counter-productive. > A good on-topic reading is "Avoid Buffered I/O" by Steve Adams available at > http://www.ixora.com.au/tips/avoid_buffered_io.htm Thanks, if I ever switch from PG to Oracle, I'll keep that in mind. Now, for a little bit of REAL WORLD experience. Once you've got your sort memory and shared buffers to certain levels, increasing them isn't going to help you. In my case, I increased them until I stopped seeing performance increases, then quadrupled them anyway. Increasing them further is *not* going to help me. However, keeping the database in memory cache *does* help me. Even under very significant load (4 processors going full-tilt!), the disk lights only blink *occasionally*, and that's a good thing. Disk bottlenecks really suck. > also, I don't want to "always keep the *entire* database in disk cache" - I > want to keep cached only the frequently accessed parts of the data Why? Do I/O bottlenecks excite you? If you have the RAM, not using it is wasteful. Disks are a place to store data for when the power goes out, not where you want to do your database work from. steve
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: