From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Vacuums on large busy databases |
Date: | 2006-09-15 00:07:09 |
Message-ID: | 530B4050-130F-441D-9F4A-EA0AF30DADA9@fastcrypt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 14-Sep-06, at 7:50 PM, Francisco Reyes wrote:
> Dave Cramer writes:
>
>> personally, I'd set this to about 6G. This doesn't actually
>> consume memory it is just a setting to tell postgresql how much
>> memory is being used for cache and kernel buffers
>
> Gotcha. Will increase further.
>
>> regarding shared buffers I'd make this much bigger, like 2GB or more
>
> Will do 2GB on the weekend. From what I read this requires shared
> memory so have to restart my machine (FreeBSD).
>
> if I plan to give shared buffers 2GB, how much more over that
> should I give the total shared memory kern.ipc.shmmax? 2.5GB?
I generally make it slightly bigger. is shmmax the size of the
maximum chunk allowed or the total ?
>
> Also will shared buffers impact inserts/updates at all?
> I wish the postgresql.org site docs would mention what will be
> impacted.
Yes, it will, however not as dramatically as what you are seeing with
effective_cache
>
> Comments like: This setting must be at least 16, as well as at
> least twice the value of max_connections; however, settings
> significantly higher than the minimum are usually needed for good
> performance.
>
> Are usefull, but could use some improvement.. increase on what? All
> performance? inserts? updates? selects?
>
> For instance, increasing effective_cache_size has made a noticeable
> difference in selects. However as I talk to the developers we are
> still doing marginally in the inserts. About 150/min.
The reason is that with effective_cache the select plans changed (for
the better) ; it's unlikely that the insert plans will change.
>
> There is spare CPU cycles, both raid cards are doing considerably
> less they can do.. so next I am going to try and research what
> parameters I need to bump to increase inserts. Today I increased
> checkpoint_segments from the default to 64. Now looking at
> wall_buffers.
>
> It would be most helpfull to have something on the docs to specify
> what each setting affects most such as reads, writes, updates,
> inserts, etc..
It's an art unfortunately.
>
Dave
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Stone | 2006-09-15 00:08:21 | Re: Vacuums on large busy databases |
Previous Message | Francisco Reyes | 2006-09-15 00:04:39 | Re: Vacuums on large busy databases |