Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #7494: WAL replay speed depends heavily on the shared_buffers size

From: Valentine Gogichashvili <valgog(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #7494: WAL replay speed depends heavily on the shared_buffers size
Date: 2012-08-15 16:02:57
Message-ID: CAP93muW3v30gJAe=_Q9eZx9SqhNOXZWd1HKpHs7jvX-_ZOa_eg@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Hallo John,

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:40 PM, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:

> On 08/15/12 6:36 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> We warn against making shared buffers > 8GB, and this is perhaps another
>> good reason.
>>
>
> I generally keep it at no more than 2gb as I've never found any
> performance improvements going higher, on systems with 48gb ram, and had
> more than a few performance degradations with larger shared buffers.
>
>
we see up to 10x performance increase with bigger shared_buffers in case of
this database. Main database entities are about 20GB in size and we see
that performance drops considerably when running with smaller
shared_buffers smaller then that.

Regards,

-- Valentin

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-08-15 16:53:44
Subject: Re: Possible Bug in 9.2beta3
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2012-08-15 16:02:16
Subject: Re: BUG #6165: documentation bug in plpgsql-declarations.html and plpgsql-statements.html (or plpgsql parser bug)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group