Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Peripheral Links

Header And Logo

PostgreSQL
| The world's most advanced open source database.

Site Navigation

Search archives
  Advanced Search

Re: Database size Vs performance degradation


  • From: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
  • To: Dave North <DNorth(at)signiant(dot)com>
  • Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
  • Subject: Re: Database size Vs performance degradation
  • Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:51:47 +0200
  • Message-id: <4890AA33.6000309@lelarge.info> <text/plain>

Dave North a écrit :
[...]
I'd suggest re-tuning as follows:

1) Increase shared_buffers to 10,000, test. Things should be a bit faster.

2) Increase checkpoint_segments to 30, test. What you want to watch for here whether there are periods where the server seems to freeze for a couple of seconds. That's a "checkpoint spike". If this happens, reduce checkpoint_segments to some sort of middle ground; some people never get above 10 before it's a problem.

3) Increase shared_buffers in larger chunks, as long as you don't see any problematic spikes you might usefully keep going until it's set to at least 100,000 before improvements level off.

Do you happen to know if these are "reload" or "restart" tunable
parameters?  I think I've read somewhere before that they are restart
parameters (assuming I've set SHMMAX high enough of course)


shared_buffers and checkpoint_segments both need a restart.
[...]
I have to say, I've learnt a whole load from you folks here this
morning...very enlightening.  I'm now moving on to your site Greg! :)


There's much to learn from Greg's site. I was kinda impressed by all the good articles in it.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com



Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996 – 2012 PostgreSQL Global Development Group