Re: pg_xlog size growing untill it fills the partition

From: Marcin Mańk <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michal TOMA <mt(at)sicoop(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_xlog size growing untill it fills the partition
Date: 2013-10-07 13:23:33
Message-ID: CAK61fk4Xv7r3CtEv5VFyNQF6=baRxE1HBnCk7af5zbFhJdWyXA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:56 PM, Michal TOMA <mt(at)sicoop(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Now I have:
> checkpoint_completion_target = 0.9
> wal_buffers = 8MB
> checkpoint_segments = 16
> checkpoint_timeout = 20min
> shared_buffers = 2GB
> log_checkpoints = on
>
> This is what I can see in the log:
> 2013-10-03 13:58:56 CEST LOG: checkpoint starting: xlog
> 2013-10-03 13:59:56 CEST LOG: checkpoint complete: wrote 448 buffers
> (0.2%); 0 transaction log file(s) added, 9 removed, 18 recycled;
> write=39.144 s, s, sync=12102.311 s, total=12234.608 s; sync files=667,
> longest=181.374 s, average=18.144 s
> 2013-10-03 22:30:25 CEST LOG: checkpoint starting: xlog time
>

From your logs, it seems that the writes are spread all over the (fairly
large) database. Is that correct? What is the database size? What is the
size of the working data set (i.e. the set of rows that are in use)?

I heard of people having good results with setting a low value for
shared_buffers (like 128MB) in a high write activity scenarios. Setting it
that low would mean that checkpoints would have 16 times less to do.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michal TOMA 2013-10-07 14:05:31 Re: pg_xlog size growing untill it fills the partition
Previous Message janek12 2013-10-07 13:16:51 pg_similarity