Yeah seems reasonable. The last thing I'd look at is something like improperly configured dns service. Are you connecting by IP or by host name? On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mike Blackwell <mike.blackwell@xxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm wondering about that. However, the database server and the server doing > the bulk loads are on the same subnet. Traceroute shows only a single hop. > Traceroute and ping both show reply times in the area of .25 - .50 ms or so. > Is that reasonable? > > __________________________________________________________________________________ > Mike Blackwell | Technical Analyst, Distribution Services/Rollout Management > | RR Donnelley > 1750 Wallace Ave | St Charles, IL 60174-3401 > Office: 630.313.7818 > Mike.Blackwell@xxxxxxx > http://www.rrdonnelley.com > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Mike Blackwell <mike.blackwell@xxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> > >> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Scott Marlowe >> > <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> I'd run vmstat and look for high cs or int numbers (100k and above) to >> >> see if you're maybe seeing an issue with that. A lot of times a >> >> "slow" server is just too much process switching. But yeah, the >> >> graphs you've posted don't seem overly bad. >> > >> > >> > >> > Thanks for the tip. Here's a quick look at those numbers under that >> > same >> > load. Watching it for a while longer didn't show any spikes. That >> > doesn't >> > seem to be it, either. >> >> Yep it all looks good to me. Are you sure you're not getting network >> lag or something like that? > > -- To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
