HOW TO MAKE POKERTRACKER FLY . . . . (well almost)

[zubs1aa]

except the only people needing this speed are people buying HH and essentially cheating

I can't even play poker anymore bc of my wonderful government. This is just pure boredom until the WSOP.

lol i feel your pain as a US player. I figured you were supremely bored. GL at the WSOP.

[kes1981]

My final attempt at making PokerTracker fly..... leaving for the WSOP next week so no more free time.

SSD's are very good for PT3 performance, but overclocking your CPU seems to be king. I would love to experment with a standard hard drive with my overclocked CPU to see the true difference. What I do know is that the OCZ Vertex 2 + i7-2600k OC to 4.9GHz with HT burns through HH

I imported all my hands from 2010:




I imported over 1 million hands in under 14 minutes. That's 1,288h/s!!!!!! Absolutely insane. I vacuumed and analyzed after the import and it took 31 seconds (didn't update cache). When I start playing online again, I'm going to replace the OCZ Vertex 2 with an OCZ RevoDrive X2. Should be insane.

[WhiteRider]

That's awesome!

[MoniesRemovalPLC]

germaniac wrote:

Just start with your current postgresql.conf file and change the setting for wal_buffers to 1MB.
This setting is under the WRITE AHEAD LOG Section and is most likely commented out by a #;
meaning that currently PSQL uses the default setting of 64kB. If an increase to 1MB [default x16]
gives you a performance boost keep trying to increase the value.

Run import tests before and after the change. Then try different settings, e.g. 4MB, 8MB, etc.
The same goes for the temp_buffers setting which is under the RESOURCE USAGE heading.
The default value for this parameter is 8MB. I found using three times that or three times the
amount for wal_buffers to work for me. [i.e. 24MB temp_buffers with up to 8MB wal_buffers
or in my case 36MB temp_buffers with 12MB wal_buffers.]

can i go ahead and perform the same kind of tuning including adjusting my Query Planning value to be optimal for SSD configuration in Postgres 9 ?

[kraada]

The wal_buffers setting is still there in PostgreSQL 9. For more details on the PostgreSQL 9 WAL see this documentation.

[MoniesRemovalPLC]

tarix wrote:

wal_buffers only effect writes. If you are trying to fix query speed those are different settings.

Postgresql 8.4: Query Planning

If you have an SSD then you'll want to tune down to the random_page_cost value. Since sequential is 1.0 you are basically telling postgres how much slower a random read is. My guess is that for SSD the value should be 2.0 or lower.

this sounds like what i am after since my destroyer HUD is still a little slow to update whilst playing 4 tables of rush. I have tweaked up my wal buffer / temps by 3x as recommended and improved my impoirt to 450 h/s - can you tell me where in the postgres 9 config i will find the random_page_cost value so i can get my SSDs flying thx

[kraada]

It's in the postgresql.conf file, in the Query Tuning section, in the Planner Cost Constants subsection. Don't forget to remove the # at the beginning of the line after making the changes you want otherwise PostgreSQL will still ignore them (lines with a # at the front are not interpreted).

[colossk]

In order for the changes in the wal and temp buffers to take effect I need to remove the # symbol in front of them, correct?

[WhiteRider]

Correct - the # comments out the line and means it isn't used.

[PartyAnimal]

Roughly how long would it take to defragment a 500 GB HD, e.g., less than 8 hours? My 44 GB PT3 database took 15 hours to update the cache, so I want to have an idea how long I can neither play nor use my laptop when defragmenting.

How often should a grinder that plays around 4000 hands/day defragment?

Also, making sure that you frequently
defragment that drive (if its HDD(s) not SSD(s)), as this also helps import speeds.
I run a defrag cycle after downloading new hands and before importing them and it
does make a noticable difference.