Re: Re: Great Bridge benchmark results for Postgres, 4 others - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ned Lilly
Subject Re: Re: Great Bridge benchmark results for Postgres, 4 others
Date
Msg-id 39996F7D.CD725E1@greatbridge.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Great Bridge benchmark results for Postgres, 4 others  (Mark Kirkwood <markir@i4free.co.nz>)
List pgsql-general
Mark Kirkwood wrote:

> In a related vein, is it possible that any relevant database parameter settings might be
> published to help folk get the best out of their Postgresql systems ? ( apologies if they are
> there and I missed them )

Hi Mark, here's some more info from the lead engineer on the project for Xperts, Richard Brosnahan
(cc'ed here).  Please feel free to contact him directly.

--

With PostgreSQL, we increased the size of the cache, and increased the
number of simultaneous users. We did this by starting the database with a
command that included parameters for this purpose. Out of the box,
PostgreSQL is very conservative with resource use, and thus only allows 32
simultaneous connections. Increasing the number of simultaneous users
requires an increase in cache size. This boost in cache size also boosts
performace by a small margin.

We also executed a process called "vacuum analyze" after loading the tables,
but before the test. This process optimizes indexes and frees up disk space
a bit. The optimized indexes boost performance by some margin.




pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Ned Lilly
Date:
Subject: Re: Great Bridge benchmark results for Postgres, 4 others
Next
From: Ned Lilly
Date:
Subject: Re: Great Bridge benchmark results for Postgres, 4 others