From: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tory M Blue <tmblue(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres 8.2 memory weirdness |
Date: | 2008-01-28 00:08:51 |
Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.64.0801251256540.4724@westnet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Tory M Blue wrote:
> I doubled the checkpoint segments yesterday and have not seen any
> warnings. Will run with segments of 100 for a while and see how things
> look.. Anyway to make sure that there is not a number between 50 and
> 100 that makes more sense?
More segments means more disk space taken up with them and a longer crash
recovery. Those are the downsides; if you can live with those there's no
reason to run at <100 if that works for you. Fine-tuning here isn't
really that helpful.
I'm a little confused by your report through because you should still be
seeing regular checkpoint warnings if you set checkpoint_warning = 3600s ,
they should just be spaced further apart.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jignesh K. Shah | 2008-01-28 00:53:04 | Re: 1 or 2 servers for large DB scenario. |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2008-01-27 23:54:12 | Re: Vacuum and FSM page size |