On 07.06.2007, at 22:42, Greg Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Gunther Mayer wrote:
>> wal checkpoint config is on pg defaults everywhere, all relevant
>> config options are commented out. I'm no expert in wal stuff but I
>> don't see how that could cause the problem?
> Checkpoints are very resource intensive and can cause other
> processes (including your selects) to hang for a considerable
> period of time while they are processing. With the default
> parameters, they can happen very frequently. Normally
> checkpoint_segments and checkpoint_timeout are increased in order
> to keep this from happening.
> This would normally be an issue only if you're writing a
> substantial amount of data to your tables. If there are a lot of
> writes going on, you might get some improvement by adjusting those
> parameters upward; the defaults are pretty low. Make sure you read
> first so you know what you're playing with, there are some recovery
> implications invoved.
I remember us having problems with 8.0 background writer, you might
want to try turning it off. Not sure if it behaves as badly in 8.2.
increasing wal buffers might be a good idea also.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Sullivan||Date: 2007-06-08 14:03:54|
|Subject: Re: reclaiming disk space after major updates|
|Previous:||From: choksi||Date: 2007-06-08 08:22:14|
|Subject: Database size|