| From: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | A B <gentosaker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Szymon Guz <mabewlun(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences |
| Date: | 2010-11-05 11:36:34 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=9CL-O=D_eiCxx7R=1zkGhimAotnGgB_WsvC2-@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 13:32, A B <gentosaker(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I was just thinking about the case where I will have almost 100%
> selects, but still needs something better than a plain key-value
> storage so I can do some sql queries.
> The server will just boot, load data, run, hopefully not crash but if
> it would, just start over with load and run.
If you want fast read queries then changing
fsync/full_page_writes/synchronous_commit won't help you.
Just follow the regular tuning guide. shared_buffers,
effective_cache_size, work_mem, default_statistics_target can make a
difference.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Tuning_Your_PostgreSQL_Server
Regards,
Marti
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2010-11-05 11:41:33 | Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences |
| Previous Message | A B | 2010-11-05 11:36:08 | Re: Running PostgreSQL as fast as possible no matter the consequences |