Re: CentOS - PostgreSQL 9.2.13 -> 9.4
От | Michael H |
---|---|
Тема | Re: CentOS - PostgreSQL 9.2.13 -> 9.4 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 55D444A9.6010207@wemoto.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: CentOS - PostgreSQL 9.2.13 -> 9.4 (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Hi Alvaro, On 18/08/15 17:39, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> >> On 08/18/2015 09:19 AM, Melvin Davidson wrote: >>>> 8 x 16GB 1600MHz PC3-12800 DDR3 - 128GB total >>>>> shared_buffers=60GB >>> >>> I would say 60GB is too high when you have 128GB system memory. >>> Try lowering it to shared_buffers=32GB and let the O/S handle more of >>> the work. >> >> I would also look at see if you are checkpointing either via segment >> rollover or time. > > If it works fine under 9.2, why would it be a problem in 9.3 and 9.4? > Keep in mind the question is not "let's make this as fast as possible" > but rather "let's make this on par with 9.2". My aim was simply to get 9.4 to match 9.2.13, I spent about 5 days tweaking and re-testing many different configurations, When I initially installed 9.2.13 (building a replacement server for our current 9.1 setup) I made two configuration changes (shared_buffers and work_mem) and the stats were smashing 9.1. I think I just expected the same kind of performance increase (or atleast the same performance) when I went to 9.4. I'm not expecting a 20% increase against 9.2.13, but I do expect to see the same increase against 9.1. Thanks Michael > > One thing to look at is the rate of WAL generation for a set number of > transactions. Maybe the later releases are generating more WAL due to > multixacts, for instance (prior to 9.3 these weren't wal-logged.) >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: