From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: State of Beta 2 |
Date: | 2003-09-23 19:17:01 |
Message-ID: | 20030923161413.I27456@ganymede.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
actually, I didn't get near that kind of benefit ... with wal disabled,
and sort_mem/checkpoint_segments at default, I got:
import start: 22:31:38
end: 23:21:42 (~50min)
buffers: 64
sort_mem: 1024
wal disabled: yes
with checkpoint_segments and sort_mem raised, I shaved about 8min:
import start: 15:56:07
end: 16:38:56 (~42min)
buffers: 640
sort_mem: 102400
checkpoint_segments: 64
wal disabled: yes
fsync disabled: yes
As a side note, a default install with 64 shared memory buffers came in
around 56min ... then again, if looking at percentages, that is about a
25% improvement ... it just doesn't look to be that big looking at the
straight #s :)
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Vivek Khera wrote:
> >>>>> "MGF" == Marc G Fournier <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>
> MGF> I've tried restoring a >5gig database with sort_mem up to 100Meg in size,
> MGF> and didn't find that it sped up the index creation enough to make a
> MGF> difference ... shaved off a couple of minutes over the whole reload, so
> MGF> seconds off of each index ... and that was with the WAL logs also disabled
> MGF> :(
>
> Ditto for me. Can you reproduce my results by increasing
> checkpoint_buffers to some large value (I use 50)? this shaved
> something like 60 minutes off of my restore.
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Manfred Koizar | 2003-09-23 19:24:35 | Re: How to get the total number of rows returned by query |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-09-23 18:35:13 | Re: [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X |