Re: Moving pg_xlog

From: Himanshu Baweja <himanshubaweja(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Moving pg_xlog
Date: 2005-06-02 14:47:21
Message-ID: 20050602144721.15002.qmail@web51004.mail.yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>It seems highly unlikely that putting more stuff on the xlog disk will
>improve performance --- at least not if your bottleneck is update speed.

Tom you are right.. i did some testing...
1) default config--- xlog on disk1 and data on disk2=>
27 mins and 22 secs
2) xlog and some tables on disk1 and rest of tables on disk2=>
28 mins and 38 secs

but the most startling of the results is....
3) xlog on disk1 and half the tables on partition 1 of disk2 and other half on partition 2 of disk2
24 mins and 14 secs

??????????
shouldnt moving data to diff partitions degrade performance instead of enhancing it....

also in configuration 1, my heap_blks_hit/heap_blks_fetched was good enough....
but in configuration 3, its was really low.. something of the order of 1/15...
still the performance improved....

any ideas.....
does moving across partitions help...

Regards
Himanshu

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Brad Might 2005-06-02 15:03:43 Re: Specific query performance problem help requested - postgresql 7.4
Previous Message Mindaugas Riauba 2005-06-02 14:24:47 Re: How to avoid database bloat