2009/10/28 Denis BUCHER <dbucherml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
yes. This simply means, that in case of any failure (power outage, etc) - data log could be slightly older, but if you have busy DB on the other hand - low number here, means a lot of checkpoints written - which slows down performance. So it is a trade-off.
8.1 is pretty old. Go for 8.3 if you want something old enough (as in, stable-and-old-but-not-too-old). Or 8.4 if you are interested in newest features.
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz a écrit :
> <mailto:dbucherml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:Oh yes, instead of DELETE FROM table; ? Ok thanks for the tip
>
> Dear all,
>
> I need to optimize a database used by approx 10 people, I don't need to
> have the perfect config, simply to avoid stupid bottle necks and follow
> the best practices...
>
> The database is used from a web interface the whole work day with
> "normal" requests (nothing very special).
>
> And each morning huge tables are DELETED and all data is INSERTed new
> from a script. (Well, "huge" is very relative, it's only 400'000
> records)
>
> use truncate, to clear the tables.
8.1.17
> For now, we only planned a VACUUM ANALYSE eacha night.
>
> if it is 8.3+, don't , as autovacuum takes care of that.
Ok no problem in increasing this value, to, let's say... 50 ?
> But the database complained about checkpoint_segments (currently = 3)
>
> depending on traffic, that's pretty low. You should increment it, beyond
> 12 if possible.
yes. This simply means, that in case of any failure (power outage, etc) - data log could be slightly older, but if you have busy DB on the other hand - low number here, means a lot of checkpoints written - which slows down performance. So it is a trade-off.
8.1 is pretty old. Go for 8.3 if you want something old enough (as in, stable-and-old-but-not-too-old). Or 8.4 if you are interested in newest features.
--
GJ
