Re: performance problem - 10.000 databases - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: performance problem - 10.000 databases
Date
Msg-id 20031108203823.GQ24094@ns.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: performance problem - 10.000 databases  (Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@libertyrms.info>)
List pgsql-admin
* Christopher Browne (cbbrowne@libertyrms.info) wrote:
> On one of our test servers, I set "fsync=false", and a test load's
> load time dropped from about 90 minutes to 3 minutes.  (It was REALLY
> update heavy, with huge numbers of tiny transactions.)
>
> Which is, yes, quite spectacularly faster.  But also quite
> spectacularly unsafe.
>
> I'm willing to live with the risk on a test box whose purpose is
> _testing_; it's certainly not a good thing to do in production.

Would it be possible to have the effectively done for a specific
transaction?  If this was done as a single large transaction could there
be an option to say "don't fsync this until it's all done and then do it
all" or something?  Just looking for a way to get the 'best of both
worlds'...

    Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: "bagley@traderonline.com"
Date:
Subject: revoke create table from a user
Next
From: Steven Tower
Date:
Subject: Re: Database Error (Bogus atrribute number 24....)