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

Re: Comparative performance

From: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>
To: Joe <svn(at)freedomcircle(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Comparative performance
Date: 2005-09-29 05:38:38
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0509290733420.28238-100000@zigo.dhs.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Joe wrote:

> Before I post the EXPLAIN and the table schema I'd appreciate
> confirmation that this list is the appropriate forum. 

It is and and useful things to show are

 * the slow query
 * EXPLAIN ANALYZE of the query
 * the output of \d for each table involved in the query
 * the output of SHOW ALL;
 * The amount of memory the machine have

The settings that are the most important to tune in postgresql.conf for
performance is in my opinion; shared_buffers, effective_cache_size and
(to a lesser extent) work_mem.

-- 
/Dennis Björklund


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Ron PeacetreeDate: 2005-09-29 06:21:10
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
Previous:From: Jeffrey W. BakerDate: 2005-09-29 04:33:46
Subject: Sequential I/O Cost (was Re: A Better External Sort?)

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