On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Kelvin Quee<kelvinq(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> Thanks for the quick reply.
> I have been staring at *top* for a while and it's mostly been 40% in
> userspace and 30% in system. Wait is rather low and never ventures
> beyond 1%.
> My hardware is a duo core AMD Athlon64 X2 5000+, 1GB RAM and a single
> 160 GB SATA II hard disk drive.
So I take it you're on a tight budget then? I'm guessing you could
put a single quad core cpu and 8 Gigs of ram in place for a reasonable
price. I'd highly recommend setting up at least software RAID-1 for
> I will go look at Slony now.
Might be overkill if you can get by on a single reasonably powerful machine.
> Scott, one question though - If my master is constantly changing,
> wouldn't the updates from the master to the slave also slow down the
Yes it will, but the overhead for the slave is much less than the master.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-07-22 13:54:37|
|Subject: Re: Atomic access to large arrays |
|Previous:||From: Victor de Buen||Date: 2009-07-22 08:12:42|
|Subject: Re: Atomic access to large arrays|