Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote: > As far as Load Test is concerned, i have tried to provide all the relevant > details. Please inform me, if i have left any.
Thanks! How large were the tables? Did you run all the queries concurrently? At this point, I think it'd be better to run them separately so that you can look at the impact on each kind of operation in isolation. What kind of an I/O system does the server have? It'd be interesting to get the cache hit/miss ratios, as well as the output of iostat (or similar) during the test. How much of the benefit is due to reduced random I/O? What does the numbers look like if the the tables are small enough to fit in RAM? You should do some tuning, the PostgreSQL default configuration is not tuned for maximum performance. At least increase checkpoint_segments and checkpoint_timeout and shared_buffers. Though I noticed that you're running on Windows; I don't think anyone's done any serious performance testing or tuning on Windows yet, so I'm not sure how you should tune that. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
