Re: Backup/Restore too slow - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Russell Smith
Subject Re: Backup/Restore too slow
Date
Msg-id 459587B8.8070507@pws.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Backup/Restore too slow  (Sebastián Baioni <sebaioni-postgresql@yahoo.com.ar>)
List pgsql-performance
Sebastián Baioni wrote:
Thanks for answering.
This is my configuration:
# - Memory -

shared_buffers = 1000        # min 16, at least max_connections*2, 8KB each
#work_mem = 1024        # min 64, size in KB
#maintenance_work_mem = 16384    # min 1024, size in KB
#max_stack_depth = 2048        # min 100, size in KB

The PC where we are runing PostgreSQL server is:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor
3000+
1.79 GHz, 1.93 GB RAM
with WindowsXP Proffesional, Version 2002 Service Pack 2.

How should we set it?
Shared buffers even on a workstation should be higher than 1000 if you want some performance.  It depends how much memory you have spare to use for PostgreSQL.  But something like
shared_buffers = 20000
maintenance_work_mem = 256000

Will certainly give you a performance boost.  You will have to adjust those figures based on whatever else you are doing on the machine.

Russell Smith.

Thanks a lot!
     Sebastián

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> escribió:
Rod Taylor writes:
> Rebuilding the indexes or integrity confirmations are probably taking
> most of the time.

> What is your work_mem setting?

maintenance_work_mem is the thing to look at, actually. I concur that
bumping it up might help.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Simon Riggs"
Date:
Subject: Re: URGENT: Out of disk space pg_xlog
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS