Re: Performance

Ogden <lists@darkstatic.com> wrote:

> I have been wrestling with the configuration of the dedicated Postges 9.0.3
> server at work and granted, there's more activity on the production server, but
> the same queries take twice as long on the beefier server than my mac at home.
> I have pasted what I have changed in postgresql.conf - I am wondering if
> there's any way one can help me change things around to be more efficient.
>
> Dedicated PostgreSQL 9.0.3 Server with 16GB Ram
>
> Heavy write and read (for reporting and calculations) server.
>
> max_connections = 350
> shared_buffers = 4096MB
> work_mem = 32MB
> maintenance_work_mem = 512MB

That's okay.


>
>
> seq_page_cost = 0.02                    # measured on an arbitrary scale
> random_page_cost = 0.03

Do you have super, Super, SUPER fast disks? I think, this (seq_page_cost
and random_page_cost) are completly wrong.



> cpu_tuple_cost = 0.02
> effective_cache_size = 8192MB
>
>
>
> The planner costs seem a bit low but this was from suggestions from this very
> list a while ago.

Sure? Can you tell us a link into the archive?


Andreas
--
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintentional side effect.                              (Linus Torvalds)
"If I was god, I would recompile penguin with --enable-fly."   (unknown)
Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe.              N 51.05082°, E 13.56889°