Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > This confused me. ?If we are assuing the data is in
> > effective_cache_size, why are we adding sequential/random page cost to
> > the query cost routines?
>
> See the comments for index_pages_fetched(). We basically
Scott,
I don't know if you received my private email, but just in case you did not I
am posting the infomration here.
I have a new set of servers coming in - Dual Xeon E5620's, 96GB RAM, 18
spindles (1 RAID1 for OS - SATA, 12 disk RAID10 for data - SAS, RAID-1 for logs
- SAS, 2 hot spares S
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Robert, Mark,
>
> I have not been able to reproduce this issue in a clean test on 9.0. As
> a result, I now think that it was related to the FSM being too small on
> the user's 8.3 instance, and will consider it resolved.
I used to try and s
On 01/02/11 07:27, Josh Berkus wrote:
Robert, Mark,
I have not been able to reproduce this issue in a clean test on 9.0. As
a result, I now think that it was related to the FSM being too small on
the user's 8.3 instance, and will consider it resolved.
Right - it might be interesting to see i
On 01/30/2011 11:38 PM, Mladen Gogala wrote:
Mark Felder wrote:
Why do you feel the need to defrag your *nix box?
Let's stick to the original question and leave my motivation for some other
time. Have you used the product? If you have, I'd be happy to hear about your
experience with it.
Tha
Interesting.
Would have been nice if the test was with a raid-10 setup as raid-5 is not very
good for writes...
Would you get much of a performance increase with a write-cached ssd even if
you got a raid controller with (battery-backed) cache?
/Lars
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: Greg
Robert, Mark,
I have not been able to reproduce this issue in a clean test on 9.0. As
a result, I now think that it was related to the FSM being too small on
the user's 8.3 instance, and will consider it resolved.
--
-- Josh Berkus
* Mladen Gogala:
> Did anyone try using "shake" while the cluster is active?
As far as I can tell, it's totally unsafe.
--
Florian Weimer
BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-72
* Mark Felder:
> Why do you feel the need to defrag your *nix box?
Some file systems (such as XFS) read the whole extent list into RAM
when a file is opened. When the extend list is long due to
fragmentation, this can take a *long* time (in the order of minutes
with multi-gigabyte Oracle Berkele
