On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Patvs<patvs@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > -4 One a scale from 1 to 10, how significant are the following on > performance increase: > -[ ] Getting a faster harddisk (RAID or a SSD) > -[ ] Getting a faster CPU > -[ ] Upgrading PostgreSQL (8.2 and 8.3) to 8.4 > -[ ] Tweaking PostgreSQL (increasing # shared_buffers, wal_buffers, > effective_cache_size, etc.) > -[10!] Something else? It sounds like you have specific performance problems you're trying to address. Given the use case it seems surprising that you're looking at such heavy-duty hardware. It seems more likely that PokerTracker/Holdem Manager is missing some indexes in its schema or that some queries could be tweaked to run more efficiently. Perhaps if you set log_statement_duration and send any slow queries here we would find a problem that could be fixed. -- greg http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
