| From: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rob Fielding <rob(at)dsvr(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL Optimisation - configuration and usage |
| Date: | 2004-02-29 00:52:52 |
| Message-ID: | 1078015971.24316.9.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-pitr pgsql-performance |
> random_page_cost = 0.5
Not likely. The lowest this value should ever be is 1, and thats if
you're using something like a ram drive.
If you're drives are doing a ton of extra random IO due to the above
(rather than sequential reads) it would lower the throughput quite a
bit.
Try a value of 2 for a while.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bort, Paul | 2004-02-29 01:18:45 | Re: Collaboration Tool Proposal |
| Previous Message | Gavin M. Roy | 2004-02-29 00:33:38 | Re: [HACKERS] Any Gentoo users interested in a slotted PostgreSQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rob Fielding | 2004-02-29 13:08:01 | Re: WAL Optimisation - configuration and usage |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-02-28 19:37:26 | Re: WAL Optimisation - configuration and usage |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rob Fielding | 2004-02-29 13:08:01 | Re: WAL Optimisation - configuration and usage |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-02-28 19:37:26 | Re: WAL Optimisation - configuration and usage |