Re: bad performance on Solaris 10

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
Cc: Chris Mair <list(at)1006(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: bad performance on Solaris 10
Date: 2006-04-05 21:48:24
Message-ID: 20060405214824.GB13673@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Chris,
>
> On 4/5/06 2:31 PM, "Chris Mair" <list(at)1006(dot)org> wrote:
>
> > Doing what http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/jkshah suggests:
> > wal_sync_method = fsync (unchanged)
> > wal_buffers = 128 (was 8)
> > checkpoint_segments = 128 (was 3)
> > bgwriter_all_percent = 0 (was 0.333)
> > bgwriter_all_maxpages = 0 (was 5)
> > and leaving everything else default (solarispackages from pgfoundry)
> > increased performance ~ 7 times!
>
> In the recent past, Jignesh Shaw of Sun MDE discovered that changing the
> bgwriter_* parameters to zero had a dramatic positive impact on performance.

This essentially means stopping all bgwriter activity, thereby deferring
all I/O until checkpoint. Was this considered? With
checkpoint_segments to 128, it wouldn't surprise me that there wasn't
any checkpoint executed at all during the whole test ...

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Luke Lonergan 2006-04-05 21:54:13 Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3
Previous Message Juan Casero (FL FLC) 2006-04-05 21:45:03 Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3