| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Craig Ringer" <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Very slow (2 tuples/second) sequential scan after bulk insert; speed returns to ~500 tuples/second after commit |
| Date: | 2008-03-11 06:24:42 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0803102324i66fa5376rca1bc3d250bc8317@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> According
> to oprofile, all the time is spent in TransactionIdIsInProgress. I think
> it would be pretty straightforward to store the committed subtransaction
> ids in a sorted array, instead of a linked list, and binary search.
Assuming that in most of the cases, there will be many committed and few aborted
subtransactions, how about storing the list of *aborted* subtransactions ?
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-03-11 07:27:07 | Re: [PATCHES] Fix for large file support (nonsegment mode support) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-03-11 03:03:58 | Re: Terminating a backend |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albert Cervera Areny | 2008-03-11 08:34:30 | Re: count * performance issue |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2008-03-11 04:14:32 | Re: UPDATE 66k rows too slow |