Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dave Cramer wrote:


The box has 3 GB of memory. I would think that BigDBMS would be hurt by this more than PG. Here are the settings I've modified in postgresql.conf:

As I said you need to set shared_buffers to at least 750MB this is the starting point, it can actually go higher. Additionally effective cache should be set to 2.25 G turning fsync is not a real world situation. Additional tuning of file systems can provide some gain, however as Craig pointed out some queries may need to be tweaked.

Dave, thanks for the hard numbers, I'll try them. I agree turning fsync off is not a production option. In another reply to my original posting, Alex mentioned that BigDBMS gets an advantage from its async IO. So simply as a test, I turned fsync off in an attempt to open wide all the pipes.

Regarding shared_buffers=750MB, the last discussions I remember on this subject said that anything over 10,000 (8K buffers = 80 MB) had unproven benefits. So I'm surprised to see such a large value suggested. I'll certainly give it a try and see what happens.


autovacuum=on
stats_row_level = on
max_connections = 10
listen_addresses = 'db01,localhost'
shared_buffers = 128MB
work_mem = 16MB
maintenance_work_mem = 64MB
temp_buffers = 32MB
max_fsm_pages = 204800
checkpoint_segments = 30
redirect_stderr = on
log_line_prefix = '%t %d'
--
Guy Rouillier


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux