Re: [PERFORM] Big Memory Boxes and pgtune

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 10/28/16 2:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> >> * A very high shared_buffers (in newer releases, it is not uncommon to >> have many, many GB of) > > > Keep in mind that you might get very poor results if shared_buffers is > large, but not large

Re: [PERFORM] Perf decreased although server is better

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Benjamin Toueg wrote: > > Stream gives substantially better results with the new server (before/after) Yep, the new server can access RAM at about twice the speed of the old. > I've run "bonnie++ -u postgres -d /tmp/ -s 4096M -r 1096" on both > machines. I don't k

[PERFORM] Hot migration of tables

So I have a data warehouse type of postgresql server. Each day a new db is created and new data is inserted into the new db (around 20G). The data is fairly simple in structure, around 100 tables and some of the table is pretty big with millions of rows. Each table has only a primary key, no foreig

Re: [PERFORM] Perf decreased although server is better

Stream gives substantially better results with the new server (before /after ) I've run "bonnie++ -u postgres -d /tmp/ -s 4096M -r 1096" on both machines. I don't know how to read bonnie++ results (before /af