From: | "Anjan Dave" <adave(at)vantage(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Rod Taylor" <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
Subject: | Re: can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs |
Date: | 2004-10-27 03:12:20 |
Message-ID: | 4BAFBB6B9CC46F41B2AD7D9F4BBAF7850985E5@vt-pe2550-001.vantage.vantage.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Josh,
I have increased them to 30, will see if that helps. Space is not a concern. slightly longer recovery time could be fine too. Wonder what people use (examples) for this value for high volume databases (except for dump/restore)...?
I don't know what is checkpoint_sibling. I'll read about it if there's some info on it somewhere.
Thanks,
Anjan
-----Original Message-----
From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com]
Sent: Tue 10/26/2004 8:42 PM
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Anjan Dave; Tom Lane; Rod Taylor
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs
Anjan,
> Oct 26 17:26:25 vl-pe6650-003 postgres[14273]: [4-1] LOG: recycled
> transaction
> log file "0000000B00000082"
> ...
> Oct 26 17:31:27 vl-pe6650-003 postgres[14508]: [2-1] LOG: recycled
> transaction
> log file "0000000B00000083"
> Oct 26 17:31:27 vl-pe6650-003 postgres[14508]: [3-1] LOG: recycled
> transaction
> log file "0000000B00000084"
> Oct 26 17:31:27 vl-pe6650-003 postgres[14508]: [4-1] LOG: recycled
> transaction
> log file "0000000B00000085"
Looks like you're running out of disk space for pending transactions. Can you
afford more checkpoint_segments? Have you considered checkpoint_siblings?
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-27 03:21:31 | Re: can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2004-10-27 02:30:34 | Re: [PATCHES] ARC Memory Usage analysis |