Re: PostgreSQL scalability on Sun UltraSparc T1

From: Arjen van der Meijden <acmmailing(at)tweakers(dot)net>
To: Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL scalability on Sun UltraSparc T1
Date: 2006-08-07 13:45:08
Message-ID: 44D743E4.6050109@tweakers.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Hi Markus,

As said, our environment really was a read-mostly one. So we didn't do
much inserts/updates and thus spent no time tuning those values and left
them as default settings.

Best regards,

Arjen

Markus Schaber wrote:
> Hi, Arjen,
>
> Arjen van der Meijden wrote:
>
>> It was the 8core version with 16GB memory... but actually that's just
>> overkill, the active portions of the database easily fits in 8GB and a
>> test on another machine with just 2GB didn't even show that much
>> improvements when going to 7GB (6x1G, 2x 512M), it was mostly in the
>> range of 10% improvement or less.
>
> I'd be interested in the commit_siblings and commit_delay settings,
> tuning them could give a high increase on throughput for highly
> concurrent insert/update workloads, at the cost of latency (and thus
> worse results for low concurrency situations).
>
> Different fsync method settings can also make a difference (I presume
> that syncing was enabled).
>
> HTH,
> Markus
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Saranya Sivakumar 2006-08-07 15:35:02 Re: [PERFORM] 7.3.2 pg_restore very slow
Previous Message Markus Schaber 2006-08-07 13:32:39 Re: sub select performance due to seq scans