Re: Big Memory Boxes and pgtune

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Warner, Gary, Jr" <gar(at)uab(dot)edu>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Big Memory Boxes and pgtune
Date: 2016-10-28 19:33:10
Message-ID: 44137c5c-2117-f497-7355-12ae06c1b299@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 10/28/2016 08:44 AM, Warner, Gary, Jr wrote:
> I've recently been blessed to move one of my databases onto a huge IBM P8 computer. Its a power PC architecture with 20 8-way cores (so postgres SHOULD believe there are 160 cores available) and 1 TB of RAM.
>
> I've always done my postgres tuning with a copy of "pgtune" which says in the output:
>
> # WARNING
> # this tool not being optimal
> # for very high memory systems
>
> So . . . what would I want to do differently based on the fact that I have a "very high memory system"?

The most obvious is that you are going to want to have (depending on
PostgreSQL version):

* A very high shared_buffers (in newer releases, it is not uncommon to
have many, many GB of)
* Use that work_mem baby. You have 1TB available? Take your average data
set return, and make work_mem at least that.
* IIRC (and this may be old advice), maintenance_work_mem up to 4GB. As
I recall it won't effectively use more than that but I could be wrong.

Lastly but most importantly, test test test.

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andre Henry 2016-10-31 19:19:58 Tuning Checkpoints
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2016-10-28 17:09:51 Re: Big Memory Boxes and pgtune