Re: good settings for DB parameters such as shared_buffers, checkpoint_segment in Postrgesql 9

From: tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz
To: "Vick Khera" <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: good settings for DB parameters such as shared_buffers, checkpoint_segment in Postrgesql 9
Date: 2010-11-11 14:11:14
Message-ID: a151fae0de265480450f3f6f1e2863db.squirrel@sq.gransy.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 3:30 AM, tuanhoanganh <hatuan05(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> My Computer is running POS with Postgres 8.9.11 database

Not sure which version is that. There's nothing like 8.9.11 ...

>>  Ram : 16GB
>>  OS : Windows 2008 R2
>>  CPU XEON 2G
>>  User : 50-60 user (connect ~ 200 connects, I increase Windows
>> SharedSection=1024,20480,1024 for > 125 connects).
>>  DISK : RAID 1
>> What will be good settings for DB parameters such as shared_buffers,
>> checkpoint_segment and etc.
>> My application run slowly when >= 30 users
>
> I'd start by optimizing your queries, and looking for both extra and
> missing indexes that would help your queries.

Well, it's always useful to have a decent settings (default one is very
conservative and may significantly hurt performance in some cases).
Anyway, on Linux I'd bump up shared buffers (to something like 512MB) and
work_mem (maybe 4MB), increased effective_cache_size (to about 10GB), etc.
But he mentions Windows 2008 and I have no experience with running PG on
this OS.

> What kind of disk do you have? Are these just local SATA drives?
> Perhaps you need faster drives.

I think it's too early to recommend buying faster drives. You have not
identified the bottleneck and what's causing it.

regards
Tomas

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Siebert 2010-11-11 15:40:45 Re: Considering Solid State Drives
Previous Message Vick Khera 2010-11-11 13:35:39 Re: Considering Solid State Drives