Re: restore time: sort_mem vs. checkpoing_segments

From: Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: restore time: sort_mem vs. checkpoing_segments
Date: 2003-09-22 20:17:54
Message-ID: 16239.22770.504961.514819@yertle.int.kciLink.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>>>>> "RT" == Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:

RT> hmm... i wonder what would happen if you pushed your sort_mem higher...
RT> on some of our development boxes and upgrade scripts, i push the
RT> sort_mem to 102400 and sometimes even higher depending on the box. this
RT> really speeds up my restores quit a bit (and is generally safe as i make
RT> sure there isn't any other activity going on at the time)

I was just checking, and I already ran test with larger sort_mem. the
checkpoint segments made more of a difference...

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nick Fankhauser 2003-09-22 20:42:27 How to make n_distinct more accurate.
Previous Message Beauty Center 2003-09-20 17:21:26 Sexier, Plumper L|ps can be yours only $24.76