Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine?

From: "Henrik Steffen" <steffen(at)city-map(dot)de>
To: "Steve Wolfe" <nw(at)codon(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine?
Date: 2002-11-14 19:26:11
Message-ID: 01a101c28c13$b0c28300$7100a8c0@STEINKAMP
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-performance


hi steve,

why fsync? - what's fsync? never heard of it... google tells
me something about syncing of remote hosts ... so why should I
activate it ?? ... I conclude, it's probably disabled because
I don't know what it is ....

it's a raid-1 ide system

--

Mit freundlichem Gruß

Henrik Steffen
Geschäftsführer

top concepts Internetmarketing GmbH
Am Steinkamp 7 - D-21684 Stade - Germany
--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.topconcepts.com Tel. +49 4141 991230
mail: steffen(at)topconcepts(dot)com Fax. +49 4141 991233
--------------------------------------------------------
24h-Support Hotline: +49 1908 34697 (EUR 1.86/Min,topc)
--------------------------------------------------------
Ihr SMS-Gateway: JETZT NEU unter: http://sms.city-map.de
System-Partner gesucht: http://www.franchise.city-map.de
--------------------------------------------------------
Handelsregister: AG Stade HRB 5811 - UstId: DE 213645563
--------------------------------------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Wolfe" <nw(at)codon(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Upgrade to dual processor machine?

> > The cache-field is saying 873548K cached at the moment
> > Is this a "whole bunch of cache" in your opinion? Is it too much?
>
> Too much cache? It ain't possible. ; )
>
> For what it's worth, my DB machine generally uses about 1.25 gigs for
> disk cache, in addition to the 64 megs that are on the RAID card, and
> that's just fine with me. I allocate 256 megs of shared memory (32768
> buffers), and the machine hums along very nicely. vmstat shows that
> actual reads to the disk are *extremely* rare, and the writes that come
> from inserts/etc. are nicely buffered.
>
> Here's how I chose 256 megs for shared buffers: First, I increased the
> shared buffer amount until I didn't see any more performance benefits.
> Then I doubled it just for fun. ; )
>
> Again, in your message it seemed like you were doing quite a bit of
> writes - have you disabled fsync, and what sort of disk system do you
> have?
>
> steve
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message scott.marlowe 2002-11-14 19:29:16 Re: Can I install 2nd set of postgresql into the same
Previous Message Steve Wolfe 2002-11-14 18:46:15 Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine?

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message scott.marlowe 2002-11-14 19:27:42 Re: Docs about buffers and sortmem setting
Previous Message Steve Wolfe 2002-11-14 18:46:15 Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine?