From: | "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Ghislain ROUVIGNAC" <ghr(at)sylob(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slow queries after vacuum analyze |
Date: | 2012-12-18 20:09:54 |
Message-ID: | 20121218200955.14720@gmx.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Ghislain ROUVIGNAC wrote:
> Memory : In use 4 Go, Free 15Go, cache 5 Go.
If the active portion of your database is actually small enough
that it fits in the OS cache, I recommend:
seq_page_cost = 0.1
random_page_cost = 0.1
cpu_tuple_cost = 0.05
> I plan to increase various parameters as follow:
> shared_buffers = 512MB
> temp_buffers = 16MB
> work_mem = 32MB
> wal_buffers = 16MB
> checkpoint_segments = 32
> effective_cache_size = 2560MB
> default_statistics_target = 500
> autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.05
> autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.025
You could probably go a little higher on work_mem and
effective_cache_size. I would leave default_statistics_target alone
unless you see a lot of estimates which are off by more than an
order of magnitude. Even then, it is often better to set a higher
value for a few individual columns than for everything. Remember
that this setting has no effect until you reload the configuration
and then VACUUM.
-Kevin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-12-19 01:05:05 | Re: [PERFORM] Slow query: bitmap scan troubles |
Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-12-18 06:00:16 | Re: [PERFORM] Slow query: bitmap scan troubles |