From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: : PG9.0 - Checkpoint tuning and pg_stat_bgwriter |
Date: | 2011-10-04 22:47:10 |
Message-ID: | CAOR=d=3GHG_jK=N7v0Ea2DuM2qLkdnbJsnktXCZ6t6JG1Tu35g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 10/04/2011 03:50 AM, Venkat Balaji wrote:
>>
>> I had a look at the pg_stat_bgwriter as well.
>
> Try saving it like this instead:
>
> select now(),* from pg_stat_bgwriter;
>
> And collect two data points, space a day or more apart. That gives a lot
> more information about the rate at which things are actually happening. The
> long-term totals are less interesting than that.
>
> Generally the first round of tuning work here is to increase
> checkpoint_segments until most checkpoints appear in checkpoints_timed
> rather than checkpoints_req. After that, increasing checkpoint_timeout
> might also be useful.
That last paragraph should be printed out and posted on every pgsql
admin's cubicle wall.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-10-04 23:33:23 | Re: Query with order by and limit is very slow - wrong index used |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2011-10-04 22:32:00 | Re: : PG9.0 - Checkpoint tuning and pg_stat_bgwriter |