On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Mike McCann <mccann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We are in the fortunate situation of having more money than time to help
> solve our PostgreSQL 9.1 performance problem.
>
> Our server hosts databases that are about 1 GB in size with the largest
> tables having order 10 million 20-byte indexed records. The data are loaded
> once and then read from a web app and other client programs. Some of the
> queries execute ORDER BY on the results. There are typically less than a
> dozen read-only concurrent connections to any one database.
I wouldn't count on this being a problem that can be fixed merely by throwing money at it.
How many rows does any one of these queries need to access and then ORDER BY?
...
>If your DB is 1G, and will grow to 10G then the IO shouldn't be any
> HP ProLiant DL360p Gen 8
> Dual Intel Xeon 2.4GHz 4-core E5-2609 CPUs
> 64GB RAM
> 2x146GB 15K SAS hard drives
> 3x200GB SATA SLC SSDs
> + the usual accessories (optical drive, rail kit, dual power supplies)
problem, as the whole db should be cached in memory.
But it can take a surprisingly long time to get it cached in the first place, from a cold start.
If that is the problem, pg_prewarm could help.
Cheers,
Jeff
