Re: [PERFORM] auto vaccum is dying

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Rodrigo Barboza > wrote: > >> Hello, I have a table that receives lots of updates and inserts. >> Auto vaccum is always being cancelled on that table. >> > > Do you have

Re: [PERFORM] auto vaccum is dying

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 10/02/2014 07:43 AM, Rodrigo Barboza wrote: > >> Hello, I have a table that receives lots of updates and inserts. >> Auto vaccum is always being cancelled on that table. >> One day the database went on

[PERFORM] auto vaccum is dying

Hello, I have a table that receives lots of updates and inserts. Auto vaccum is always being cancelled on that table. One day the database went on standby and I had to act manually to recover. What should I do to avoid auto vaccum cancel?

[PERFORM] maintenance_work_mem and autovacuum_max_workers

Hi guys. I'm tuning my postgres server and I faced these 2 parameters. Today they have default values. Is default enough? How should I tune these values?

Re: [PERFORM] Segment best size

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Saturday, April 13, 2013, Rodrigo Barboza wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Rodrigo Barboza < >>>

Re: [PERFORM] Segment best size

On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Rodrigo Barboza > wrote: > >> >> >> I was receiving warning messages of pgstat timeout. >> I started looking for the solution for this problem and this doubt came >>

Re: [PERFORM] Segment best size

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:20 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Friday, April 12, 2013, Rodrigo Barboza wrote: > >> Hi guys. >> I compiled my postrges server (9.1.4) with default segment size (16MB). >> Should it be enough? Should I increase this size in compilation? >

[PERFORM] Default value checkpoint_completion_target

Hi guys. I read in some forums that this parameter is better to set it to something like 0.7. Mine is default (0.5) and sometime it logs the message: WARNING: pgstat wait timeout Could there be any relation between this parameter and the warning message? Is it safe to set it to 0.7?

Re: [PERFORM] Segment best size

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Ben Chobot wrote: > On Apr 12, 2013, at 9:45 AM, Rodrigo Barboza wrote: > > > Hi guys. > > I compiled my postrges server (9.1.4) with default segment size (16MB). > > Should it be enough? Should I increase this size in compilation? > &

[PERFORM] Segment best size

Hi guys. I compiled my postrges server (9.1.4) with default segment size (16MB). Should it be enough? Should I increase this size in compilation?

Re: [PERFORM] effective_cache_size on 32-bits postgres

res tuning website instructions. If it says it is conservative, that's good for me. On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Claudio Freire wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > > Rodrigo Barboza wrote: > > > >> So setting this as half of ram, as su

Re: [PERFORM] effective_cache_size on 32-bits postgres

So setting this as half of ram, as suggested in postgres tuning webpage should be safe? It says it is a conservative value... On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2013/3/18 Pavel Stehule : > > Hello > > > > 2013/3/18 Rodrigo Barboza : > >> H

Re: [PERFORM] effective_cache_size on 32-bits postgres

Ok, now I'm lost, who is right about the limit? Rob or Pavel? Rob, I know it should be a 64 bit, and it will be soon, but there are good reasons for this scenario and it's ok for now. On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > 2013/3/18 Rodrigo Barbo

[PERFORM] effective_cache_size on 32-bits postgres

Hi guys, I am worried about the effective_cache_size. I run a 32-bits postgres installation on a machine with 64 bits kernel. Should I limit effective_cache_size to a maximum of 2.5gb?