From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Aditya <aditya(at)grot(dot)org>, sfpug(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: optimizing selects on time-series data in Pg |
Date: | 2003-08-01 18:42:22 |
Message-ID: | 200308011142.22589.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | sfpug |
Aditya,
> > Mind checking TOP to see how much RAM your other processes on this server
> > eat? That will give us a good baseline for figuring out how much memory
> > to give Postgres.
>
> I do have some stats collection turned on in postgresql.conf, if that makes
> any difference:
No, it just uses a little memory and CPU time.
> last pid: 36063; load averages: 0.38, 0.56, 0.39 up 453+17:25:41 11:25:25
> 68 processes: 1 running, 65 sleeping, 2 stopped
> CPU states: 8.9% user, 0.0% nice, 16.3% system, 16.0% interrupt, 58.8%
> idle Mem: 95M Active, 297M Inact, 79M Wired, 25M Cache, 61M Buf, 2456K Free
> Swap: 1024M Total, 388K Used, 1023M Free
From the look of things, NFS isn't actually eating a lot of memory. So you
actually have a relatively clear field for Postgres. For the first test,
let's assume that Postgres and the Kernel cache will have 256mb available
most of the time:
set shared_buffers to 8% of the kernel cache: 256*1024/8*0.08 = about 2600
set effective_cache_size to the expected available kernel cache, say 192mb =
24576
Also, I'd lower your random_page_cost to 2.5 for your relatively unburdened
CPU.
These settings should make Postgres more likely to cache a large portion of
your table in memory.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-08-01 18:51:17 | Re: optimizing selects on time-series data in Pg |
Previous Message | Aditya | 2003-08-01 18:38:57 | Re: optimizing selects on time-series data in Pg |