Tuning for PostGreSQL Database

Jason Stone freebsd-performance at dfmm.org
Mon Jul 21 05:06:49 PDT 2003


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Tom Samplonius wrote:
> Softupdates on, async off.  Softupdates is just a better async.

postgresql fsync's all its files before returning from a commit in order
to ensure durability, right?  Does softupdates interfere with the
functioning of sync(2)/fsync(2)?


On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > I would recommend 4.8 over 5.1.  Especially if you intend this to be
> > a production server.  5.1 is not ready for public consumption.
>
> Public consumption, yes.  Production consumption, no.

I recently decided to take up the issue of migrating towards 5.1 at my
company.  The way I dealt with it was to publish all of my services to 5.1
boxes and run regression tests.  For me, 5.1 provided adequate
performance, and since 5.1 is on the branch where all new dev work is
going on and 4.x is going to be end-of-lifed in the not-too-distant
future, I decided to go with 5.1.

Personally, I would only go with 4.8 if testing showed 5.1 to be
inadequate for your particular situation with your particular apps,
hardware, load, etc.  But you can only tell that by testing.


 -Jason

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Freud himself was a bit of a cold fish, and one cannot avoid the suspicion
 that he was insufficiently fondled when he was an infant.
	-- Ashley Montagu

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)
Comment: See https://private.idealab.com/public/jason/jason.gpg

iD8DBQE/G9dYswXMWWtptckRAkrNAKD6NjeQW9kFS8J//fxec1qWVUVqaACgzTmM
zeAG240i4H11u/yM/FI0E1w=
=wFfZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the freebsd-performance mailing list