Re: strange performance regression between 7.4 and 8.1
- From: Jeff Frost <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
- To: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher(at)gmail(dot)com>
- Cc: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: strange performance regression between 7.4 and 8.1
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 13:36:37 -0800 (PST)
- Message-id: <Pine(dot)LNX(dot)4(dot)64(dot)0703011334410(dot)3892(at)discord(dot)home(dot)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
Vacuum? Analayze? default_statistics_target? How many shared_buffers?
effective_cache_size? work_mem?
I'm running the autovacuum process on the 8.1 server. vacuuming on
the old server was done manually.
default_statistics_target and effective_cache_size are set to the the
defaults on both.
postgres 7.4 server:
# - Memory -
shared_buffers = 82000 # 1000 min 16, at least
max_connections*2, 8KB each
sort_mem = 8000 # 1024 min 64, size in KB
vacuum_mem = 32000 # 8192 min 1024, size in KB
# - Free Space Map -
#max_fsm_pages = 20000 # min max_fsm_relations*16, 6 bytes each
#max_fsm_relations = 1000 # min 100, ~50 bytes each
# - Kernel Resource Usage -
#max_files_per_process = 1000 # min 25
postgres 8.1 server:
# - Memory -
shared_buffers = 100000 # min 16 or max_connections*2, 8KB
each
temp_buffers = 2000 #1000 # min 100, 8KB each
max_prepared_transactions = 100 #5 # can be 0 or more
# note: increasing max_prepared_transactions costs ~600 bytes of shared
memory
# per transaction slot, plus lock space (see max_locks_per_transaction).
work_mem = 10000 #1024 # min 64, size in KB
maintenance_work_mem = 524288 #16384 # min 1024, size in KB
#max_stack_depth = 2048 # min 100, size in KB
I've also tried using the same settings from the old server on the new
one; same performance issues.
If this is a linux system, could you give us the output of the 'free' command?
Postgresql might be choosing a bad plan because your effective_cache_size is
way off (it's the default now right?). Also, what was the block read/write
speed of the SAN from your bonnie tests? Probably want to tune
random_page_cost as well if it's also at the default.
--
Jeff Frost, Owner <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
Frost Consulting, LLC http://www.frostconsultingllc.com/
Phone: 650-780-7908 FAX: 650-649-1954
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index