| From: | Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: checkpoints too frequent |
| Date: | 2003-09-05 15:41:53 |
| Message-ID: | 16216.44737.326214.974984@yertle.int.kciLink.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
>>>>> "BM" == Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
BM> Vivek, you reported recently that increasing sort_mem and
BM> checkpoint_segments increased performance. Can you run a test to see
BM> how much of that improvement was just because of increasing
BM> checkpoint_segments?
i was thinking just the same thing myself.
i'll start that run now.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai | 2003-09-05 15:43:37 | Re: 64-bit pgsql |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-05 15:40:00 | Re: Planning to force reindex of hash indexes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2003-09-05 16:09:18 | Re: [PERFORM] Seq scan of table? |
| Previous Message | Rasmus Aveskogh | 2003-09-05 15:36:50 | Re: Performance problems on a fairly big table with two |