| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | debasis(dot)moharana(at)ipathsolutions(dot)co(dot)in |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql-performance issue |
| Date: | 2016-08-29 20:14:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20160829201403.gijea6hlcaceejby@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi,
On 2016-08-20 08:38:43 +0000, debasis(dot)moharana(at)ipathsolutions(dot)co(dot)in wrote:
> I have a PostgreSQL 9.5 instance running on Windows 8 machine with 4GB of
> RAM.This server is mainly used for inserting/updating large amounts of data
> via copy/insert/update commands, and seldom for running select queries.
>
> Here are the relevant configuration parameters I changed:
>
> max_connections = 100
> shared_buffers = 512MB
> effective_cache_size = 3GB
> work_mem = 12233kB
> maintenance_work_mem = 256MB
> min_wal_size = 1GB max_wal_size = 2GB
> checkpoint_completion_target = 0.7
> wal_buffers = 16MB
> default_statistics_target = 100
>
> After setting in postgresql.conf. I run the select query to fetch large
> amount of record of 29000 in postgresql but it takes 10.3 seconds but the
> same query takes 2 seconds for execution in MSSQL.
>
> So my query is how to improve the perfermance in postgresql.
Please provide the output EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) yourquery; and your
query. Then we'll possibly be able to help you - atm we don't have
enough information.
Regards,
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bobby Mozumder | 2016-08-31 22:01:19 | Possible to find disk IOs for a Query? |
| Previous Message | Tommi Kaksonen | 2016-08-29 07:00:10 | Re: Slow query with big tables |