Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers
Дата
Msg-id 4003.1045196624@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers  ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers  (Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net>)
Список pgsql-performance
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> What I mean is say you have an enterprise server doing heaps of transactions
> with lots of work.  If you have scads of RAM, could you just shove up
> wal_buffers really high and assume it will improve performance?

There is no such thing as infinite RAM (or if there is, you paid *way*
too much for your database server).  My feeling is that it's a bad
idea to put more than you absolutely have to into single-use buffers.
Multi-purpose buffers are usually a better use of RAM.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Josh Berkus
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: JBoss CMP Performance Problems with PostgreSQL 7.2.3
Следующее
От: Kevin Brown
Дата:
Сообщение: Tuning scenarios (was Changing the default configuration)