Обсуждение: my.cnf to postgresql.conf Conversion
Hello everyone, I have a question about setting the variables in the postgresql.conf file. I have the following settings in my my.cnf file for MySQL....and need to know which variables in the postgresql.conf file would correspond to the ones below, so that I may tune my system correctly. set-variable = key_buffer=384M set-variable = max_allowed_packet=1M set-variable = table_cache=64 set-variable = thread_stack=64K set-variable = sort_buffer=2M set-variable = record_buffer=2M set-variable = thread_cache=8 # Try number of CPU's*2 for thread_concurrency set-variable = thread_concurrency=8 set-variable = myisam_sort_buffer_size=64M Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!!!! Kevin -- Kevin Old <kold@carolina.rr.com>
On 31 Oct 2002, Kevin Old wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I have a question about setting the variables in the postgresql.conf > file. I have the following settings in my my.cnf file for MySQL....and > need to know which variables in the postgresql.conf file would > correspond to the ones below, so that I may tune my system correctly. > > set-variable = key_buffer=384M > set-variable = max_allowed_packet=1M > set-variable = table_cache=64 > set-variable = thread_stack=64K > set-variable = sort_buffer=2M > set-variable = record_buffer=2M > set-variable = thread_cache=8 > # Try number of CPU's*2 for thread_concurrency > set-variable = thread_concurrency=8 > set-variable = myisam_sort_buffer_size=64M Many of these have no direct 1 to 1 correlation to Postgresql. the only ones that are pretty similar are sort_buffer and record_buffer. The ones to look at changing are first are: max_connections (the default 32 is kinda small for some servers, but fine for departmental servers. You may need to adjust fs.file-max in the kernel (I'm assuming linux here) if you go very high here.) shared_buffers (These are measured in 8k blocks. I've found anywhere from 1000 to 20000 works well, anything over that tends to be a waste of memory for most servers. Note you may need to adjust the settings for kernel.shmall and kernel.shmmax if you want this to be very high). sort_mem (bigger isn't always better here. This is the amount of memory EACH sort operation will grab when it runs, and it seems to be that it will grab all of it whether it needs it or not, so be careful not to crank this up. I've found that 2048 to 8192 are suitably large (it's measured in k I believe.) fsync (Setting this to false can more than double the speed of your database, while slightly increasing the chance that an unscheduled power down (i.e. a big dummy trips over your power cord kinda thing) but in my testing I've never lost data by pulling the plug when running with it set to false or true.) then you can look at these settings. they are used to tell the planner how to execute your query. random_page_cost (The default of 4 here is a bit high for most people. 1 to 2 seems a more realistic setting for machines with a bit of memory where a lot of your result set may be cached.) cpu_tuple_cost cpu_index_tuple_cost (setting this lower makes the machine favor using indexes) cpu_operator_cost If you are gonna update thousands of rows at a time, look at increasing these settings, which will let the database recover vacuumed rows from tables that have had massive updates. max_fsm_relations #max_fsm_pages
"scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> writes: > sort_mem (bigger isn't always better here. This is the amount of memory > EACH sort operation will grab when it runs, and it seems to be that it > will grab all of it whether it needs it or not, so be careful not to crank > this up. That's not correct -- sort_mem specifies the point at which a sort operation will start to swap data to disk (i.e. the memory is not consumed regardless). See the entry on SORT_MEM here for more info: http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/runtime-config.html Another parameter you might want to tweak is wal_buffers. Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
Scott, Thanks for your reply. I am running Solaris 2.7 with 4 400Mhz processors and 2GB RAM. I have questions still with the settings in postgresql.conf. With MySQL, the key_buffer variable seems to "rope off" a particular amount of memory for the mysql daemon. That's basically what I'm trying to do here for Postgresql. I have 200,000+ rows (approx 50 fields) going into a postgres database and I need to give it as much memory as I can. I am using the copy command, but it is still very slow.....any suggestions. My perl code and tables/queries are as optimized as they can be....postgres shows that the size is only about 3,000K when viewed in top and running the copy command......so I assume it's problem with memory allocation. Thanks, Kevin On Thu, 2002-10-31 at 17:46, scott.marlowe wrote: > On 31 Oct 2002, Kevin Old wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I have a question about setting the variables in the postgresql.conf > > file. I have the following settings in my my.cnf file for MySQL....and > > need to know which variables in the postgresql.conf file would > > correspond to the ones below, so that I may tune my system correctly. > > > > set-variable = key_buffer=384M > > set-variable = max_allowed_packet=1M > > set-variable = table_cache=64 > > set-variable = thread_stack=64K > > set-variable = sort_buffer=2M > > set-variable = record_buffer=2M > > set-variable = thread_cache=8 > > # Try number of CPU's*2 for thread_concurrency > > set-variable = thread_concurrency=8 > > set-variable = myisam_sort_buffer_size=64M > > Many of these have no direct 1 to 1 correlation to Postgresql. > > the only ones that are pretty similar are sort_buffer and record_buffer. > > The ones to look at changing are first are: > > max_connections (the default 32 is kinda small for some servers, but > fine for departmental servers. You may need to adjust fs.file-max in the > kernel (I'm assuming linux here) if you go very high here.) > > shared_buffers (These are measured in 8k blocks. I've found anywhere from > 1000 to 20000 works well, anything over that tends to be a waste of > memory for most servers. Note you may need to adjust the settings for > kernel.shmall and kernel.shmmax if you want this to be very high). > > sort_mem (bigger isn't always better here. This is the amount of memory > EACH sort operation will grab when it runs, and it seems to be that it > will grab all of it whether it needs it or not, so be careful not to crank > this up. I've found that 2048 to 8192 are suitably large (it's measured > in k I believe.) > > fsync (Setting this to false can more than double the speed of your > database, while slightly increasing the chance that an unscheduled power > down (i.e. a big dummy trips over your power cord kinda thing) but in my > testing I've never lost data by pulling the plug when running with it set > to false or true.) > > then you can look at these settings. they are used to tell the planner > how to execute your query. > > random_page_cost (The default of 4 here is a bit high for most people. 1 > to 2 seems a more realistic setting for machines with a bit of memory > where a lot of your result set may be cached.) > > cpu_tuple_cost > cpu_index_tuple_cost (setting this lower makes the machine favor using > indexes) > cpu_operator_cost > > If you are gonna update thousands of rows at a time, look at increasing > these settings, which will let the database recover vacuumed rows from > tables that have had massive updates. > > max_fsm_relations > #max_fsm_pages > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) -- Kevin Old <kold@carolina.rr.com>
Kevin Old <kold@carolina.rr.com> writes: > My perl code and tables/queries are as optimized as they can > be....postgres shows that the size is only about 3,000K when viewed in > top and running the copy command......so I assume it's problem with > memory allocation. Disabling fsync should help. Also, consider removing any indexes / foreign keys on the table you're copying into, and then re-adding them when the bulk load is finished. Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
What are your current settings for postgresql.conf? I'm not that familiar with Solaris, but I know there were some issues with the built in sort having performance issues if there were a lot of duplicate keys when sorting. That could be a possible problem, but I'm not sure how likely that is. What kinds of indexs and such do you have on that table? If you have indexes on the table, it may be faster to drop them then recreate them after a load. On 1 Nov 2002, Kevin Old wrote: > Scott, > > Thanks for your reply. I am running Solaris 2.7 with 4 400Mhz processors > and 2GB RAM. I have questions still with the settings in > postgresql.conf. With MySQL, the key_buffer variable seems to "rope > off" a particular amount of memory for the mysql daemon. That's > basically what I'm trying to do here for Postgresql. > > I have 200,000+ rows (approx 50 fields) going into a postgres database > and I need to give it as much memory as I can. > > I am using the copy command, but it is still very slow.....any > suggestions. > > My perl code and tables/queries are as optimized as they can > be....postgres shows that the size is only about 3,000K when viewed in > top and running the copy command......so I assume it's problem with > memory allocation. > > Thanks, > Kevin > > On Thu, 2002-10-31 at 17:46, scott.marlowe wrote: > > On 31 Oct 2002, Kevin Old wrote: > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > I have a question about setting the variables in the postgresql.conf > > > file. I have the following settings in my my.cnf file for MySQL....and > > > need to know which variables in the postgresql.conf file would > > > correspond to the ones below, so that I may tune my system correctly. > > > > > > set-variable = key_buffer=384M > > > set-variable = max_allowed_packet=1M > > > set-variable = table_cache=64 > > > set-variable = thread_stack=64K > > > set-variable = sort_buffer=2M > > > set-variable = record_buffer=2M > > > set-variable = thread_cache=8 > > > # Try number of CPU's*2 for thread_concurrency > > > set-variable = thread_concurrency=8 > > > set-variable = myisam_sort_buffer_size=64M > > > > Many of these have no direct 1 to 1 correlation to Postgresql. > > > > the only ones that are pretty similar are sort_buffer and record_buffer. > > > > The ones to look at changing are first are: > > > > max_connections (the default 32 is kinda small for some servers, but > > fine for departmental servers. You may need to adjust fs.file-max in the > > kernel (I'm assuming linux here) if you go very high here.) > > > > shared_buffers (These are measured in 8k blocks. I've found anywhere from > > 1000 to 20000 works well, anything over that tends to be a waste of > > memory for most servers. Note you may need to adjust the settings for > > kernel.shmall and kernel.shmmax if you want this to be very high). > > > > sort_mem (bigger isn't always better here. This is the amount of memory > > EACH sort operation will grab when it runs, and it seems to be that it > > will grab all of it whether it needs it or not, so be careful not to crank > > this up. I've found that 2048 to 8192 are suitably large (it's measured > > in k I believe.) > > > > fsync (Setting this to false can more than double the speed of your > > database, while slightly increasing the chance that an unscheduled power > > down (i.e. a big dummy trips over your power cord kinda thing) but in my > > testing I've never lost data by pulling the plug when running with it set > > to false or true.) > > > > then you can look at these settings. they are used to tell the planner > > how to execute your query. > > > > random_page_cost (The default of 4 here is a bit high for most people. 1 > > to 2 seems a more realistic setting for machines with a bit of memory > > where a lot of your result set may be cached.) > > > > cpu_tuple_cost > > cpu_index_tuple_cost (setting this lower makes the machine favor using > > indexes) > > cpu_operator_cost > > > > If you are gonna update thousands of rows at a time, look at increasing > > these settings, which will let the database recover vacuumed rows from > > tables that have had massive updates. > > > > max_fsm_relations > > #max_fsm_pages > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) >
scott.marlowe wrote: > What are your current settings for postgresql.conf? > > I'm not that familiar with Solaris, but I know there were some issues with > the built in sort having performance issues if there were a lot of > duplicate keys when sorting. That could be a possible problem, but I'm > not sure how likely that is. The solaris duplicate keys problem is fixed in 7.3beta by using our own NetBSD qsort. :-) -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073