Re: Slow vacuum performance

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Patrick Hatcher
Тема Re: Slow vacuum performance
Дата
Msg-id OFA489C546.854AFB77-ON88256EBA.005485A9-88256EBA.0055A575@fds.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Slow vacuum performance  (Andrew McMillan <andrew@catalyst.net.nz>)
Список pgsql-performance

Thanks!

Patrick Hatcher



Andrew McMillan <andrew@catalyst.net.nz>
Sent by: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

06/21/04 03:11 AM

To
Patrick Hatcher <PHatcher@macys.com>
cc
pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject
Re: [PERFORM] Slow vacuum performance





On Fri, 2004-06-18 at 19:51 -0700, Patrick Hatcher wrote:
>
> Thanks!
>  
> My effective_cache_size = 625000
>  
> I thought that having the shared_buffers above 2k or 3k didn't gain
> any performance and may in fact degrade it?

Hi Patrick,


Quoting from:
http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/annotated_conf_e.html

shared_buffers
       Sets the size of PostgreSQL's' memory buffer where queries are
       held before being fed into the Kernel buffer of the host system.
       It's very important to remember that this is only a holding
       area, and not the total memory available for the server. As
       such, resist the urge to set this number to a large portion of
       your RAM, as this will actually degrade performance on many
       operating systems. Members of the pgsql-performance mailing list
       have found useful values in the range of 1000-6000, depending on
       available RAM, database size, and number of concurrent queries.
       For servers with very large amounts of available RAM (more than
       1 GB) increasing this setting to 6-15% or available RAM has
       worked well for some users. The real analysis of the precise
       best setting is not fully understood and is more readily
       determined through testing than calculation.  
       
       As a rule of thumb, observe shared memory usage of PostgreSQL
       with tools like ipcs and determine the setting. Remember that
       this is only half the story. You also need to set
       effective_cache_size so that postgreSQL will use available
       memory optimally.

Using this conservatively, on an 8G system, 6% would be roughly 60,000
pages - considerably higher than 2-3000...

One day when I wasn't timid (well, OK, I was desperate :-), I did see a
_dramatic_ performance improvement in a single very narrow activity by
setting shared_buffers to 300000 on a 4G RAM system (I was rolling back
a transaction involving an update to 2.8 million rows) , but afterwards
I set shared_buffers back to 10000, which I have now increased to 20000
on that system.


You may also want to look at:
http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/perf.html

Or indeed, peruse the articles regularly as they appear:
http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/

Regards,
                                                                                    Andrew McMillan

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew @ Catalyst .Net .NZ  Ltd,  PO Box 11-053, Manners St,  Wellington
WEB: http://catalyst.net.nz/            PHYS: Level 2, 150-154 Willis St
DDI: +64(4)803-2201      MOB: +64(272)DEBIAN      OFFICE: +64(4)499-2267
          Tomorrow will be cancelled due to lack of interest.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Вложения

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Richard Huxton
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_fetch_array
Следующее
От: Andrew Hammond
Дата:
Сообщение: Postgres over Linux NBD or NFS