From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Henrik Steffen" <steffen(at)city-map(dot)de> |
Cc: | "Justin Clift" <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
Date: | 2002-11-11 07:32:43 |
Message-ID: | 87y980tvc4.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
"Henrik Steffen" <steffen(at)city-map(dot)de> writes:
> > - What do the clients connect with? JDBC/ODBC/libpq/etc?
> I am using Pg.pm --- this is called libpq, isn't it?
Well, it's a thin Perl wrapper over libpq (which is the C client
API). You said you're using mod_perl: you may wish to consider using
DBI and DBD::Pg instead of Pg.pm, so you can make use of persistent
connections using Apache::DBI.
> > - Have you configured the memory after installation of PostgreSQL, so
> > it's better optimised than the defaults?
> no - what should I do? Looking at 'top' right now, I see the following:
> Mem 1020808K av, 1015840K used, 4968K free, 1356K shrd, 32852K buff
No, Justin is referring to the memory-related configuration options in
postgresql.conf, like shared_buffers, wal_buffers, sort_mem, and the
like.
> So, what do you suggest to gain more performance?
IMHO, dual processors would likely be a good performance improvement.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Clift | 2002-11-11 07:44:24 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
Previous Message | Henrik Steffen | 2002-11-11 07:05:27 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Clift | 2002-11-11 07:44:24 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |
Previous Message | Henrik Steffen | 2002-11-11 07:05:27 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |