Re: good pc but bad performance,why?

From: huang yaqin <hyq(at)gthome(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: good pc but bad performance,why?
Date: 2004-04-07 04:00:37
Message-ID: 0HVS00F9Q906F7@mail.gthome.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

hello！

Thanks, you are right.
I use "postmaster -o "-F" " to start my PG，and performance improved greatly.

Best regards,
huang yaqin

>huang yaqin <hyq(at)gthome(dot)com> writes:
>> I have some question when I use postgresql 7.4.1 on redhat adv server 2.1 .
>> I use IBM335 as server, it has 4 cpus, 1G RAM. but I got very bad performance.
>> I can only do about 50 inserts per sencond. Event worse than my pc(PIII 800,256M RAM), can anyone give me some advice?
>
>If the cheap machine appears to be able to commit more transactions
>per second than the better one, it's very likely because the cheap
>machine has a disk that lies about write completion. Is the server
>using SCSI disks by any chance? To a first approximation, IDE drives
>lie by default, SCSI drives don't.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
>
>
>Powered by MessageSoft SMG
>SPAM, virus-free and secure email
>http://www.messagesoft.com

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

　　　　　　　　致
礼！


　　　　　　　　huang yaqin
　　　　　　　　hyq(at)gthome(dot)com
　　　　　　　　　　2004-04-07

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-04-07 05:26:02 Re: Raw devices vs. Filesystems
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2004-04-06 21:41:53 Re: possible improvement between G4 and G5