Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Slow Postgresql server

From: Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>
To: Guido Neitzer <lists(at)event-s(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Slow Postgresql server
Date: 2007-04-12 14:59:10
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patchespgsql-performance
At 10:08 AM 4/12/2007, Guido Neitzer wrote:
>On 12.04.2007, at 07:26, Ron wrote:
>>You need to buy RAM and HD.
>Before he does that, wouldn't it be more useful, to find out WHY he
>has so much IO?

1= Unless I missed something, the OP described pg being used as a 
backend DB for a webserver.

I know the typical IO demands of that scenario better than I sometimes want to.

2= 1GB of RAM + effectively 1 160GB HD = p*ss poor DB IO support.
~ 1/2 that RAM is going to be used for OS stuff, leaving only ~512MB 
of RAM to be used supporting pg.
That RAID 1 set is effectively 1 HD head that all IO requests are 
going to contend for.
Even if the HD in question is a 15Krpm screamer, that level of HW 
contention has very adverse implications.

Completely agree that at some point the queries need to be examined 
(ditto the table schema, etc), but this system is starting off in a 
Bad Place for its stated purpose IME.
Some minimum stuff is obvious even w/o spending time looking at 
anything beyond the HW config.

Ron Peacetree

>Have I missed that or has nobody suggested finding the slow queries
>(when you have much IO on them, they might be slow at least with a
>high shared memory setting).
>So, my first idea is, to turn on query logging for queries longer
>than a xy milliseconds, "explain analyse" these queries and see
>wether there are a lot of seq scans involved, which would explain the
>high IO.
>Just an idea, perhaps I missed that step in that discussion
>somewhere ...
>But yes, it might also be, that the server is swapping, that's
>another thing to find out.
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Guido NeitzerDate: 2007-04-12 15:19:57
Subject: Re: Slow Postgresql server
Previous:From: Guido NeitzerDate: 2007-04-12 14:08:03
Subject: Re: Slow Postgresql server

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2007-04-12 15:08:28
Subject: Re: Makefile patch to make gcov work on Postgres contrib modules
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-12 14:58:16
Subject: Re: autovacuum multiworkers, patch 5

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2007-04-12 15:12:30
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Fix mdsync never-ending loop problem
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-12 14:58:16
Subject: Re: autovacuum multiworkers, patch 5

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group