On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Tory M Blue wrote:
> Ya my boxes are pretty well stacked, but a question. How does one get
> the memory usage of a query. You state to look at explain analyze but
> this gives timing and costs, but is one of the numbers memory or do I
> have to take values and do s
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Jorge Montero
wrote:
>
>
Tory M Blue 02/26/10 12:52 PM >>>
>>>
>>> This is too much. Since you have 300 connections, you will probably swap
>>> because of this setting, since each connection may use this much
>>> work_mem. The rule of the thumb is to set thi
> -Mensaje original-
> De: Tory M Blue
>
> 2010/2/25 Devrim GÜNDÜZ :
> > On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 22:12 -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
> >> shared_buffers = 1500MB
> >
> > Some people tend to increase this to 2.2GB(32-bit) or 4-6
> GB (64 bit),
> > if needed. Please note that more shared_buff
>>> Tory M Blue 02/26/10 12:52 PM >>>
>>
>> This is too much. Since you have 300 connections, you will probably swap
>> because of this setting, since each connection may use this much
>> work_mem. The rule of the thumb is to set this to a lower general value
>> (say, 1-2 MB), and set it per-que
2010/2/25 Devrim GÜNDÜZ :
> On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 23:01 -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
>
>> Checkpoint_timeout is the default and that looks like 5 mins (300
>> seconds). And is obviously why I have such a discrepancy between time
>> reached and requested.
>
> If you have a high load, you may want to st
2010/2/25 Devrim GÜNDÜZ :
> On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 22:12 -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
>> shared_buffers = 1500MB
>
> Some people tend to increase this to 2.2GB(32-bit) or 4-6 GB (64 bit),
> if needed. Please note that more shared_buffers will lead to more
> pressure on bgwriter, but it also has lots of
On Feb 26, 2010, at 11:23 AM, Tory M Blue wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Kevin Grittner
> wrote:
>> Tory M Blue wrote:
>>
>>> 2010-02-25 22:53:13 PST LOG: checkpoint starting: time
>>> 2010-02-25 22:53:17 PST postgres postgres [local] LOG: unexpected
>>> EOF on client connection
>>>
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Tory M Blue wrote:
>
>> 2010-02-25 22:53:13 PST LOG: checkpoint starting: time
>> 2010-02-25 22:53:17 PST postgres postgres [local] LOG: unexpected
>> EOF on client connection
>> 2010-02-25 22:55:43 PST LOG: checkpoint complete: wrote 34155
Tory M Blue wrote:
> 2010-02-25 22:53:13 PST LOG: checkpoint starting: time
> 2010-02-25 22:53:17 PST postgres postgres [local] LOG: unexpected
> EOF on client connection
> 2010-02-25 22:55:43 PST LOG: checkpoint complete: wrote 34155
> buffers (17.8%); 0 transaction log file(s) added, 0 removed
Tory M Blue wrote:
2010-02-25 22:10:41 PSTLOG: checkpoint complete: wrote 44503
buffers (23.2%); 0 transaction log file(s) added, 0 removed, 20
recycled; write=148.539 s, sync=0.000 s, total=148.540 s
This one is typical for your list so I'll only comment on it. This is
writing out 350M
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 23:01 -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
> Checkpoint_timeout is the default and that looks like 5 mins (300
> seconds). And is obviously why I have such a discrepancy between time
> reached and requested.
If you have a high load, you may want to start tuning with 15 minutes,
and bu
2010/2/25 Tory M Blue :
> 2010/2/25 Devrim GÜNDÜZ :
>> On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 22:12 -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
>>> shared_buffers = 1500MB
>>
>> Some people tend to increase this to 2.2GB(32-bit) or 4-6 GB (64 bit),
>> if needed. Please note that more shared_buffers will lead to more
>> pressure on b
2010/2/25 Devrim GÜNDÜZ :
> On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 22:12 -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
>> shared_buffers = 1500MB
>
> Some people tend to increase this to 2.2GB(32-bit) or 4-6 GB (64 bit),
> if needed. Please note that more shared_buffers will lead to more
> pressure on bgwriter, but it also has lots of
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 22:12 -0800, Tory M Blue wrote:
> shared_buffers = 1500MB
Some people tend to increase this to 2.2GB(32-bit) or 4-6 GB (64 bit),
if needed. Please note that more shared_buffers will lead to more
pressure on bgwriter, but it also has lots of benefits, too.
> work_mem = 100MB
Friday, February 26, 2010, 7:20:38 AM you wrote:
> "checkpoint_completion_target (floating point)
> interesting that it's a .5 second default setting and I'm seeing
> exactly that .5 second delay.
It's not an exact time, but a multiplier to 'checkpoint
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Tory M Blue wrote:
> Okay ladies and gents and the rest of you :)
>
> It's time I dig into another issue, and that's a curious 5 second
> delay on connect, on occasion. Now, I believe the network to be sound
> and there are zero errors on any servers, no retrans,
Okay ladies and gents and the rest of you :)
It's time I dig into another issue, and that's a curious 5 second
delay on connect, on occasion. Now, I believe the network to be sound
and there are zero errors on any servers, no retrans, no runts, nada
nada nada. However I will continue to run tests
17 matches
Mail list logo
