Re: Xeon vs Opteron - second revision - tests and questions
От | Marcin Giedz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Xeon vs Opteron - second revision - tests and questions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4374F071.9010808@eulerhermes.pl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Xeon vs Opteron - second revision - tests and questions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Xeon vs Opteron - second revision - tests and questions
|
Список | pgsql-admin |
Tom Lane napisał(a): >Marcin Giedz <marcin.giedz@eulerhermes.pl> writes: > > >>However I still can see 'spikey' performance but not as much as before >>changes. What can I do more to eliminate or smooth these spikes? >> >> > >The spikes are certainly caused by checkpoints. You can fool with the >checkpoint timing via checkpoint_segments and checkpoint_timeout. > > I didn't mention before but I changed checkpoint_segments to 300 but no checkpoint_time. Disk space doesn't matter at all ... time to recovery.... shouldn't be very long (I don't have much experiences with this as I do online backup every day). Can anyone please tell me what values of these two parametres are reasonable? Regards, Marcin >Usually people put them as far apart as they can stand (the constraint >on this is mainly how long you'd like to wait for recovery after a >system crash, and how much disk space you can spare for WAL logs). >Increasing the bg_writer parameters can be expected to dampen the spikes >but not eliminate them completely. > > regards, tom lane > > >
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: