Re: Vacuums on large busy databases

From: Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>
To: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
Cc: Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuums on large busy databases
Date: 2006-09-14 17:36:55
Message-ID: cone.1158255415.91768.31944.1000@zoraida.natserv.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Dave Cramer writes:

> What is effective_cache set to ?

Increasing this seems to have helped significantly a web app. Load times
seem magnitudes faster.

Increased it to effective_cache_size = 12288 # 96MB

What is a reasonable number?
I estimate I have at least 1 to 2 GB free of memory.

Don't want to get too carried away right now with too many changes.. because
right now we have very few connections to that database (usually less than
10), but I expect it to go to a norm of 20+.. so need to make sure I won't
make changes that will be a problem in that scenario.

So far only see one setting that can be an issue: work_mem
so have it set to only 32768.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig A. James 2006-09-14 18:05:32 RAID 0 not as fast as expected
Previous Message Francisco Reyes 2006-09-14 17:17:40 Re: Vacuums on large busy databases