Re: Sequential scan on FK join

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Martin Nickel <martin(at)portant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Sequential scan on FK join
Date: 2005-10-22 13:25:12
Message-ID: 20051022132512.GE18064@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Martin Nickel wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:52:15 +0100, Richard Huxton wrote:
> > 3. Actually - are you happy that your general configuration is OK?
> We're running dual Opteron 244s with 4G of memory. The platform is
> Suse 9.3, 64 bit. The database is on a 3ware 9500S-8 sata raid controller
> configured raid 10 with 4 drives plus a hot swap. Drives are
> 7400 rpm (don't remember model or size).
>
> I'm running Postgres 8.0.3. Here are some of the relevant conf file
> parameters:
> shared_buffers = 50000
> sort_mem = 8192
> work_mem = 256000

Interesting that you set both sort_mem and work_mem. Do you realize
that the former is an obsolete name, and currently a synonym for the
latter? Maybe the problem is that you are using too much memory for
sorts, forcing swap usage, etc.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/DXLWNGRJD34J
"La persona que no quería pecar / estaba obligada a sentarse
en duras y empinadas sillas / desprovistas, por cierto
de blandos atenuantes" (Patricio Vogel)

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kishore B 2005-10-22 21:12:05 Need help in setting optimal configuration for a huge database.
Previous Message Karl O. Pinc 2005-10-22 05:05:21 Using LIMIT 1 in plpgsql PERFORM statements