From: | Albert Cervera Areny <albert(at)sedifa(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Miernik <public(at)public(dot)miernik(dot)name> |
Subject: | Re: how to fix problem then when two queries run at the same time, it takes longer to complete then if run in sequence |
Date: | 2008-07-24 07:38:28 |
Message-ID: | 200807240938.28482.albert@sedifa.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
A Dimecres 23 Juliol 2008, Miernik va escriure:
> I have a PostgreSQL database on a very low-resource Xen virtual machine,
> 48 MB RAM. When two queries run at the same time, it takes longer to
> complete then if run in sequence. Is there perhaps a way to install
> something like a query sequencer, which would process queries in a FIFO
> manner, one at a time, even if a new query comes before the last one
> running is finished, it would not give the new query to the server
> before the one running now finishes? That would greatly improve
> performance.
You didn't mention your PostgreSQL version. Since 8.3 there's "synchronized
scans" which greatly improves performance if concurrent queries have to do a
sequential scan on the same table. Of course, if queries don't hit the same
table there'll be no improvements in performance...
>
> Any tips in general for running PostgreSQL on such low-resource machine?
>
> I have:
>
> shared_buffers = 5MB
> work_mem = 1024kB
>
> are these good values, or could perhaps changing something improve it a
> bit? Any other parameters to look at?
>
> --
> Miernik
> http://miernik.name/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2008-07-24 08:44:03 | Re: how to fix problem then when two queries run at the same time, it takes longer to complete then if run in sequence |
Previous Message | Miernik | 2008-07-23 23:04:04 | Re: how to fix problem then when two queries run at the same time, it takes longer to complete then if run in sequence |