On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 12:08:39PM +0100, Stephane Bailliez wrote:
> Jared Mauch wrote:
>> I do large databases in Pg, like 300GB/day of new data.
>
> That's impressive. Would it be possible to have details on your hardware,
> schema and configuration and type of usage ?
>
> I'm sure there's
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:57:46AM +0200, Adrian Moisey wrote:
> What sort of information do you need from me ?
Ratio of read vs write operations (select vs insert/copy).
average number of indicies per table
average table size. (analyze verbose if you want to get
into m
Jared Mauch wrote:
I do large databases in Pg, like 300GB/day of new data.
That's impressive. Would it be possible to have details on your
hardware, schema and configuration and type of usage ?
I'm sure there's something to learn in there for a lot of people (or at
least for me)
Ch
Hi
I do large databases in Pg, like 300GB/day of new data. Need a lot
more data on what you're having issues with.
That is big!
What sort of information do you need from me ?
Is your problem with performance database reads?
writes? (insert/copy?) How many indicies do you have?
Hi
Also, we're running the db on ext3 with noatime. Should I look at
changing or getting rid of journaling ?
No (unless you like really long fsck times). data=writeback is safe with
PostgreSQL, though.
I tested that on a dev box, and I didn't notice a difference when using
pgbench
--
A
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 10:18 +0200, Adrian Moisey wrote:
> We recently converted to postgres (from mssql) and we're having
> performance issues.
I think you need to say more about what the performance issues actually
are, otherwise everybody will just speculate you to death.
--
Simon Riggs
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Guillaume Smet wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 9:27 AM, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
wal_sync_method = open_sync
Do you recommend it in every situation or just because data are on a
SAN? Do you have any numbers/real cases explaining this choice.
Sync writes are faste
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 12:27:33AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Adrian Moisey wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> We recently converted to postgres (from mssql) and we're having
>> performance issues. Not all the issues are related to postgres, but we're
>> trying to sort everything out.
Hi,
Hi Joshua,
On Jan 9, 2008 9:27 AM, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> wal_sync_method = open_sync
Do you recommend it in every situation or just because data are on a
SAN? Do you have any numbers/real cases explaining this choice.
Thanks.
--
Guillaume
---(end
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 08:16:48 -0800
Alan Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 January 2008, Adrian Moisey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Also, we're running the db on ext3 with noatime. Should I look at
> > changing or getting ri
On Wednesday 09 January 2008, Adrian Moisey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Also, we're running the db on ext3 with noatime. Should I look at
> changing or getting rid of journaling ?
No (unless you like really long fsck times). data=writeback is safe with
PostgreSQL, though.
Hi
We recently converted to postgres (from mssql) and we're having
performance issues. Not all the issues are related to postgres, but
we're trying to sort everything out.
The server is running ubuntu Gutsy with the database stored on a IBM
SAN. It is a Dell box with dual quad core 2.00GHz
Hi,
what segment size do you use for the san partition? This could also be a
bottle neck for db servers.
Frank
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Adrian Moisey wrote:
Hi
We recently converted to postgres (from mssql) and we're having
performance issues. Not all the issues are related to postgres, but
we're trying to sort everything out.
The server is running ubuntu Gutsy with the database stored on a IBM
SAN. It is a Dell box with
Hi
We recently converted to postgres (from mssql) and we're having
performance issues. Not all the issues are related to postgres, but
we're trying to sort everything out.
The server is running ubuntu Gutsy with the database stored on a IBM
SAN. It is a Dell box with dual quad core 2.00GHz
15 matches
Mail list logo
