Re: Potential memory usage issue
От | David Brain |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Potential memory usage issue |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46027F65.9080909@bandwidth.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Potential memory usage issue (Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Potential memory usage issue
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Hi, Thanks for the response. Bill Moran wrote: > In response to David Brain <dbrain@bandwidth.com>: >> I recently migrated one of our large (multi-hundred GB) dbs from an >> Intel 32bit platform (Dell 1650 - running 8.1.3) to a 64bit platform >> (Dell 1950 - running 8.1.5). However I am not seeing the performance >> gains I would expect > > What were you expecting? It's possible that your expectations are > unreasonable. > Possibly - but there is a fair step up hardware performance wise from a 1650 (Dual 1.4 Ghz PIII with U160 SCSI) to a 1950 (Dual, Dual Core 2.3 Ghz Xeons with SAS) - so I wasn't necessarily expecting much from the 32->64 transition (except maybe the option to go > 4GB easily - although currently we only have 4GB in the box), but was from the hardware standpoint. I am curious as to why 'top' gives such different output on the two systems - the datasets are large and so I know I benefit from having high shared_buffers and effective_cache_size settings. > Provide more information, for one thing. I'm assuming from the top output > that this is some version of Linux, but more details on that are liable > to elicit more helpful feedback. > Yes the OS is Linux - on the 1650 version 2.6.14, on the 1950 version 2.6.18 Thanks, David. -- David Brain - bandwidth.com dbrain@bandwidth.com 919.297.1078
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: