Will higher shared_buffers improve tpcb-like benchmarks?
От | Saurabh Nanda |
---|---|
Тема | Will higher shared_buffers improve tpcb-like benchmarks? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPz=2oEnzLofpgZnAwmwaZtW-OLn5+MFRux9uFnnWs2+YecZAA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Will higher shared_buffers improve tpcb-like benchmarks?
Re: Will higher shared_buffers improve tpcb-like benchmarks? |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Hi,
I'm going crazy trying to optimise my Postgres config for a production setting [1] Once I realised random changes weren't getting my anywhere, I finally purchased PostgreSQL 10 - Higher Performance [2] and understood the impact of shared_buffers.
IIUC, shared_buffers won't have any significant impact in the following scenario, right?
-- DB size = 30GB
-- shared_buffers = 2GB
-- workload = tpcb-like
This is because the tpcb-like workload selects & updates random rows from the DB [3]. Therefore, with a 2GB shared buffer, there is only a 6-7% chance (did I get my probability correct?) that the required data will be in the shared_buffer. Did I understand this correctly?
If nothing else becomes the bottleneck (eg. periodically writing dirty pages to disk), increasing the shared_buffers to 15GB+ should have a significant impact, for this DB-size and workload, right? (The system has 64 GB RAM)
[1] Related thread at https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAPz%3D2oGdmvirLNX5kys%2BuiY7LKzCP4sTiXXob39qq6eDkEuk2Q%40mail.gmail.com
-- Saurabh.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: