Re: Tuning for mid-size server
От | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Tuning for mid-size server |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20031021213408.GA12200@libertyrms.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Tuning for mid-size server ("scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Tuning for mid-size server
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 03:11:17PM -0600, scott.marlowe wrote: > I think where it makes sense is when you have something like a report > server where the result sets may be huge, but the parellel load is load, > i.e. 5 or 10 users tossing around 100 Meg or more at time. In our case, we were noticing that truss showed an unbelievable amount of time spent by the postmaster doing open() calls to the OS (this was on Solaris 7). So we thought, "Let's try a 2G buffer size." 2G was more than enough to hold the entire data set under question. Once the buffer started to fill, even plain SELECTs started taking a long time. The buffer algorithm is just not that clever, was my conclusion. (Standard disclaimer: not a long, controlled test. It's just a bit of gossip.) A -- ---- Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street Afilias Canada Toronto, Ontario Canada <andrew@libertyrms.info> M2P 2A8 +1 416 646 3304 x110
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: