Re: Query performance over a large proportion of data - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: Query performance over a large proportion of data
Date
Msg-id 49B69E1E.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Query performance over a large proportion of data  ("Steve McLellan" <smclellan@mintel.com>)
Responses Re: Query performance over a large proportion of data  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
>>> "Steve McLellan" <smclellan@mintel.com> wrote:
> The server itself is a dual-core 3.7GHz Xeon Dell (each core
> reporting 2 logical CPUs) running an amd64 build of FreeBSD 6.2, and
> postgres 8.3.5 built from source. It's got 400GB storage in RAID-5
> (on 5 disks). It has 8GB of physical RAM. I'm able to use about 6GB
> of that for my own purposes; the server doesn't do much else but
> replicates a very low-usage mysql database.

> shared_buffers=1200MB

You might want to play with this -- that's not a bad starting point,
but your best performance with your load could be on either side of
that value.

> work_mem = 100MB

Probably kinda high, especially if you expect a lot of connections.
This much memory can be concurrently used, possibly more than once, by
each active connection.

> fsync = off

Don't use this setting unless you can afford to lose your entire
database cluster.  We use it for initial (repeatable) loads, but not
much else.

> enable_seqscan = off

Not a good idea; some queries will optimize better with seqscans.
You can probably get the behavior you want using other adjustments.

> effective_cache_size = 2000MB

From what you said above, I'd bump this up to 5GB or more.

You probably need to reduce random_page_cost.  If your caching is
complete enough, you might want to set it equal to seq_page_cost
(never set it lower that seq_page_cost!) and possibly reduce both of
these to 0.1.

Some people have had good luck with boosting cpu_tuple_cost and
cpu_index_tuple_cost.  (I've seen 0.5 for both recommended.)  I've
never had to do that, but if the earlier suggestions don't get good
plans, you might try that.

I hope that helps.

-Kevin

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: Query performance over a large proportion of data
Next
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: Query performance over a large proportion of data