Re: large dataset with write vs read clients

From: Aaron Turner <synfinatic(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: large dataset with write vs read clients
Date: 2010-10-07 22:11:29
Message-ID: AANLkTim0Bec=E1s5WeaVY4z7+BQANLsU4yrsK-=tSy9E@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Aaron Turner wrote:
>>
>> Are newer PG versions more memory efficient?
>>
>
> Moving from PostgreSQL 8.1 to 8.3 or later should make everything you do
> happen 2X to 3X faster, before even taking into account that you can tune
> the later versions better too.  See
> http://suckit.blog.hu/2009/09/29/postgresql_history for a simple comparison
> of how much performance jumped on both reads and writes in the later
> versions than what you're running.  Memory consumption will on average
> decrease too, simply via the fact that queries start and finish more
> quickly.  Given an even workload, there will be less of them running at a
> time on a newer version to keep up.
>
> Given the size of your database, I'd advise you consider a migration to a
> new version ASAP.  8.4 is a nice stable release at this point, that's the
> one to consider moving to.  The biggest single problem people upgrading from
> 8.1 to 8.3 or later see is related to changes in how data is cast between
> text and integer types; 1 doesn't equal '1' anymore is the quick explanation
> of that.  See http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Version_History for links to
> some notes on that, as well as other good resources related to upgrading.
>  This may require small application changes to deal with.
>
> Even not considering the performance increases, PostgreSQL 8.1 is due to be
> dropped from active support potentially as early as next month:
>  http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Release_Support_Policy
>
> Also:  PostgreSQL 8.1.3 has several known bugs that can lead to various
> sorts of nasty data corruption.  You should at least consider an immediate
> upgrade to the latest release of that version, 8.1.22.  Small version number
> increases in PostgreSQL only consist of serious bug fixes, not feature
> changes.  See http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning for notes about
> the project's standard for changes here, and how it feels about the risks of
> running versions with known bugs in them vs. upgrading.
>
> --
> Greg Smith, 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
> PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support  www.2ndQuadrant.us
> Author, "PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance"    Pre-ordering at:
> https://www.packtpub.com/postgresql-9-0-high-performance/book
>
>

Thanks for the info Greg. Sounds like I've got an upgrade in the near
future! :)

Again, thanks to everyone who's responded; it's been really
informative and helpful. The PG community has always proven to be
awesome!

--
Aaron Turner
http://synfin.net/         Twitter: @synfinatic
http://tcpreplay.synfin.net/ - Pcap editing and replay tools for Unix & Windows
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
    -- Benjamin Franklin
"carpe diem quam minimum credula postero"

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Crawford 2010-10-07 23:38:04 BBU Cache vs. spindles
Previous Message Dave Crooke 2010-10-07 21:51:42 Re: Odd behaviour with redundant CREATE statement