Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Bad performance in bulky updates

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: carlos(dot)reimer(at)opendb(dot)com(dot)br
Cc: "Pgsql-General(at)Postgresql(dot)Org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bad performance in bulky updates
Date: 2006-10-31 02:02:31
Message-ID: 22327.1162260151@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
"Carlos H. Reimer" <carlos(dot)reimer(at)opendb(dot)com(dot)br> writes:
> When one of the biggest tables has all lines updated for example, it takes
> at about 30 minutes for processing. If we drop all indexes (21) and let only
> the primary index the same update takes 2 minutes.

21 indexes??

If update performance is important then you should try to economize on
indexes.  Do you have evidence that each of those indexes is worth its
update costs?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Richard Broersma JrDate: 2006-10-31 03:35:14
Subject: Re: postgresql books and convertion utilities
Previous:From: Carlos H. ReimerDate: 2006-10-31 01:51:30
Subject: Bad performance in bulky updates

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group