Re: Oracle v. Postgres 9.0 query performance - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Samuel Gendler
Subject Re: Oracle v. Postgres 9.0 query performance
Date
Msg-id BANLkTimPymaH7DmhKSwXf89hzG3_O+xV=w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Oracle v. Postgres 9.0 query performance  (Tony Capobianco <tcapobianco@prospectiv.com>)
Responses Re: Oracle v. Postgres 9.0 query performance  (Tony Capobianco <tcapobianco@prospectiv.com>)
List pgsql-performance


On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Tony Capobianco <tcapobianco@prospectiv.com> wrote:
My current setting is 22G.  According to some documentation, I want to
set effective_cache_size to my OS disk cache + shared_buffers.  In this
case, I have 4 quad-core processors with 512K cache (8G) and my
shared_buffers is 7680M.  Therefore my effective_cache_size should be
approximately 16G?  Most of our other etl processes are running fine,
however I'm curious if I could see a significant performance boost by
reducing the effective_cache_size.


disk cache, not CPU memory cache.  It will be some significant fraction of total RAM on the host.  Incidentally, 16 * 512K cache = 8MB, not 8GB.



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Oracle v. Postgres 9.0 query performance
Next
From: Samuel Gendler
Date:
Subject: Re: poor performance when recreating constraints on large tables