Re: measuring spinning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: measuring spinning
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMK0YHdAKs=FAxW0AViCx5U6znTLmQGStBqcZcBvfgo4bQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to measuring spinning  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: measuring spinning
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just to whet your appetite, here are the top spinners on a 32-client
> SELECT-only test on a 32-core Itanium server.  All the locks not shown
> below have two orders of magnitude less of a problem than these do.

Please can you repeat the test, focusing on minutes 10-30 of a 30
minute test run. That removes much of the noise induced during cache
priming.

My suggested size of database is one that is 80% size of RAM, with
shared_buffers set to 40% of RAM or 2GB whichever is higher. That
represents the common case where people know how big their data is and
purchase RAM accordingly, then set shared_buffers in line with current
wisdom.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: Confusing EXPLAIN output in case of inherited tables
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Send new protocol keepalive messages to standby servers.