From: | Dennis Gearon <gearond(at)fireserve(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
Cc: | PgSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Best tweak for fast results.. ? |
Date: | 2003-08-26 17:25:28 |
Message-ID: | 3F4B9808.1080804@fireserve.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
actually, isin't 1000 tps pretty good?
Ron Johnson wrote:
>On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 08:42, JM wrote:
>
>
>>need input on parameter values on confs...
>>
>>our database is getting 1000 transactions/sec on peak periods..
>>
>>sitting on RH 7.3
>>2.4.7-10smp
>>RAM: 1028400
>>SWAP: 2040244
>>
>>queries are just simple select statements based on timestamps, varchars...
>>less on joins... on a 300K rows..
>>
>>
>
>Could it be that 1000tps is as good as your h/w can do? You didn't
>mention what kind and speed of CPU(s), SCSI-or-IDE controller(s) and
>type/speed of disk(s) you have.
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-08-26 17:30:55 | Re: Linux ready for high-volume databases? |
Previous Message | Hervé Piedvache | 2003-08-26 17:25:22 | Re: WAL Files checkpoint_timeout with voluminous delete/insert |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2003-08-26 17:44:19 | Re: Best tweak for fast results.. ? |
Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2003-08-26 17:11:41 | Re: [PERFORM] Best tweak for fast results.. ? |