Re: [SPAM?] Re: PG8 Tuning
От | Jeffrey W. Baker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [SPAM?] Re: PG8 Tuning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1123779524.6664.1.camel@toonses.gghcwest.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [SPAM?] Re: PG8 Tuning (Steve Poe <spoe@sfnet.cc>) |
Ответы |
Re: [SPAM?] Re: PG8 Tuning
Re: [SPAM?] Re: PG8 Tuning |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 08:47 +0000, Steve Poe wrote: > Paul, > > Before I say anything else, one online document which may be of > assistance to you is: > http://www.powerpostgresql.com/PerfList/ > > Some thoughts I have: > > 3) You're shared RAM setting seems overkill to me. Part of the challenge > is you're going from 1000 to 262K with no assessment in between. Each > situation can be different, but try in the range of 10 - 50K. > > 4) pg_xlog: If you're pg_xlog is on a spindle is *only* for pg_xlog > you're better off. Like Mr. Stone said earlier, this is pure dogma. In my experience, xlogs on the same volume with data is much faster if both are on battery-backed write-back RAID controller memory. Moving from this situation to xlogs on a single normal disk is going to be much slower in most cases. -jwb
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: