Re: Very big insert/join performance problem (bacula)
От | Richard Huxton |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Very big insert/join performance problem (bacula) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4A5C3E99.5060100@archonet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Very big insert/join performance problem (bacula) (Marc Cousin <cousinmarc@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Very big insert/join performance problem (bacula)
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Marc Cousin wrote: > >> Your effective_cache_size is really small for the system you seem to have - >> its the size of IO caching your os is doing and uses no resources itself. >> And 800MB of that on a system with that amount of data seems a bit unlikely >> ;-) >> >> Using `free` you can see the amount of io caching your OS is doing atm. in >> the 'cached' column. >> >> That possibly might tip some plans in a direction you prefer. >> >> What kind of machine are you running this on? > > I played with this parameter too, and it didn't influence the plan. Anyway, the > doc says it's the OS cache available for one query, No they don't. I'm guessing you're getting mixed up with work_mem. > and there may be a lot of > insert queries at the same time, so I chose to be conservative with this > value. I tried it with 8GB too, the plans were the same. > > The OS cache is around 8-10GB by the way. That's what you need to set effective_cache_size to then. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: