Re: Slow updates, poor IO

From: Dan Langille <dan(at)langille(dot)org>
To: John Huttley <John(at)mib-infotech(dot)co(dot)nz>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Slow updates, poor IO
Date: 2008-09-29 03:41:03
Message-ID: 1DFA2F1D-56D0-46B1-B9E1-27E994822FF4@langille.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


On Sep 28, 2008, at 10:01 PM, John Huttley wrote:

>
>
> Greg Smith wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, John Huttley wrote:
>>
>>> checkpoint _segments=16 is fine, going to 64 made no improvement.
>>
>> You might find that it does *after* increasing shared_buffers. If
>> the buffer cache is really small, the checkpoints can't have very
>> much work to do, so their impact on performance is smaller. Once
>> you've got a couple of hundred MB on there, the per-checkpoint
>> overhead can be considerable.
>>
> Ahh bugger, I've just trashed my test setup.

Pardon? How did you do that?

--
Dan Langille
http://langille.org/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Huttley 2008-09-29 03:47:09 Re: Slow updates, poor IO
Previous Message John Huttley 2008-09-29 03:08:51 Re: Slow updates, poor IO