Re: seperate swap drive, was Re: [ADMIN] Speed problem
От | The Hermit Hacker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: seperate swap drive, was Re: [ADMIN] Speed problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.BSF.4.05.9811042330510.2139-100000@thelab.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | seperate swap drive, was Re: [ADMIN] Speed problem (Terry Mackintosh <terry@terrym.com>) |
Список | pgsql-admin |
On Wed, 4 Nov 1998, Terry Mackintosh wrote: > > I have a rather large database as well (> 2 Meg of tuples). I thought > > my system was souped up enough: PII/400 MHz (100 MHz bus) 256 Meg SDRAM, > > 18 Gig SCSI harddrive, Red Hat Linux 5.1. However, my swap space (512 > > Meg) is on the same harddrive as the database (albeit on a separate > > partition). It sounds like you are saying that this is a no-no. > > Just that under heavy loads it may degrade performance as you yourself > mention. > > > The database runs quite fast except with processes involving repetitive > > inserts or updates. With each successive update in a continuous process, > > the speed drops (almost like an exponentially decreasing process). Plus, > > when this happens, I can't really use the computer that runs the > > database because it is soooooo slow. When I run top, the computer is > > using all 256 Meg of memory and going about 30-40 meg into swap space. > > >From what you've suggested, this 30-40 meg of swap is also competing > > with the database trying to write to the harddrive (since they are using > > the same head). > > This is the type of performance degradation I was referring to. > > > If I put in a second drive exclusively for the swap space, could this > > increase my speed? Or, would it be better to invest in more RAM so that > > the job wouldn't need to use any swap space at all? > > Why not both? :-) Are you running with fsync() disabled? What version of PostgreSQL are you running? v6.4 has several memory leak fixes in it, which may or may not help...on long term connections, memory leak *may* be attributing to your problem. If you run top while doing the 'update/inserts', does the process size just continue to rise? Something else to try...close and reconnect your insert/update process(es). Not a long term solution, just curious if that shows an overall speed improvement. Similar to the 'memory leak' problem, at least this will let go of the process, clean out the memory, and start over again.... Marc G. Fournier Systems Administrator @ hub.org primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: