Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks

From: Stefano Nichele <stefano(dot)nichele(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks
Date: 2009-01-06 19:02:39
Message-ID: 4963AACF.2070201@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Thanks for your help. I'll give you the info you asked as soon as I'll
have it (i have also to install iostat but I don't have enough privilege
to do that).

BTW, why did you said I/O bound ? Which are the parameters that
highlight that ? Sorry for my ignorance....

ste

Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Stefano Nichele
> <stefano(dot)nichele(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Hi list,
>> I would like to ask your help in order to understand if my postgresql server
>> (ver. 8.2.9) is well configured.
>> It's a quad-proc system (32 bit) with a 6 disk 1+0 RAID array and 2 separate
>> disks for the OS and write-ahead logs with 4GB of RAM.
>>
>> I don't know what is the best info to help me and so I start with some
>> vmstat information:
>>
>>
>>> vmstat -n 30
>>>
>> procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system--
>> -----cpu------
>> r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa
>> st
>> 0 23 84 129968 25060 3247860 0 0 78 50 0 2 17 5 33
>> 45 0
>>
>
> clearly i/o bound. can you throw an iostat to give some more detailed info?
> also,
> need o/s version, etc
> disk info (speed, raid controller, etc)
> my guess is your disk system is underpowered for transaction load you
> are giving.
> how many tps is the database doing?
>
> merlin
>
>

--
Stefano Nichele

Funambol Chief Architect
Funambol :: Open Source Mobile'We' for the Mass Market :: http://www.funambol.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2009-01-06 20:50:09 Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2009-01-06 18:59:02 Re: failure notice