Re: PostgreSQL Configuration Tool for Dummies

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Configuration Tool for Dummies
Date: 2007-06-19 22:46:37
Message-ID: 200706191546.38140.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Lance,

> The parameters I would think we should calculate are:
>
> max_connections
>
> shared_buffers
>
> work_mem
>
> maintenance_work_mem
>
> effective_cache_size
>
> random_page_cost

Actually, I'm going to argue against messing with random_page_cost. It's a
cannon being used when a slingshot is called for. Instead (and this was
the reason for the "What kind of CPU?" question) you want to reduce the
cpu_* costs. I generally find that if cpu_* are reduced as appropriate to
modern faster cpus, and effective_cache_size is set appropriately, a
random_page_cost of 3.5 seems to work for appropriate choice of index
scans.

If you check out my spreadsheet version of this:
http://pgfoundry.org/docman/view.php/1000106/84/calcfactors.sxc
... you'll see that the approach I found most effective was to create
profiles for each of the types of db applications, and then adjust the
numbers based on those.

Other things to adjust:
wal_buffers
checkpoint_segments
commit_delay
vacuum_delay
autovacuum

Anyway, do you have a pgfoundry ID? I should add you to the project.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-06-19 23:26:10 Re: Maintenance question / DB size anomaly...
Previous Message Kurt Overberg 2007-06-19 22:24:21 Re: Maintenance question / DB size anomaly...