Re: Low Performance for big hospital server ..

From: amrit(at)health2(dot)moph(dot)go(dot)th
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz>, Michael Adler <adler(at)pobox(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Low Performance for big hospital server ..
Date: 2005-01-02 16:28:13
Message-ID: 1104683293.41d8211d62221@webmail.moph.go.th
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> > postgresql 7.3.2-1 with RH 9 on a mechine of 2 Xeon 3.0 Ghz and ram of 4
> Gb.
>
> You may want to try disabling hyperthreading, if you don't mind
> rebooting.

Can you give me an idea why should I use the SMP kernel instead of Bigmen kernel
[turn off the hyperthreading]? Will it be better to turn off ?

> > grew up to 3.5 Gb and there were more than 160 concurent connections.
>
> Looks like your growing dataset won't fit in your OS disk cache any
> longer. Isolate your most problematic queries and check out their
> query plans. I bet you have some sequential scans that used to read
> from cache but now need to read the disk. An index may help you.
>
> More RAM wouldn't hurt. =)

I think so that there may be some query load on our programe and I try to locate
it.
But if I reduce the config to :
max_connections = 160
shared_buffers = 2048 [Total = 2.5 Gb.]
sort_mem = 8192 [Total = 1280 Mb.]
vacuum_mem = 16384
effective_cache_size = 128897 [= 1007 Mb. = 1 Gb. ]
Will it be more suitable for my server than before?

Thanks for all comment.
Amrit
Thailand

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Cramer 2005-01-02 16:56:33 Re: Low Performance for big hospital server ..
Previous Message Michael Adler 2005-01-02 14:08:28 Re: Low Performance for big hospital server ..