| From: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matthias Urlichs <smurf(at)noris(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Chris <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Alessio Bragadini <alessio(at)albourne(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Performance (was: The New Slashdot Setup (includes MySql server)) |
| Date: | 2000-05-19 11:12:00 |
| Message-ID: | 39252180.92C646F6@tpf.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Chris:
> > Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> >
> > > Nonono, the 1000 read() calls are triggered by a simple INSERT or UPDATE
> > > call. They actually scan the pg_index table of the benchmark database.
> >
> > Does this only happen on the first call to INSERT/UPDATE after
> > connecting to the database, or does it happen with all subsequent calls
> > too?
> >
> All of them. Whatever the server is looking up here, it's _not_ cached.
>
Maybe shared buffer isn't so large as to keep all the(4.1M) pg_index pages.
So it would read pages from disk every time,
Unfortunately pg_index has no index to scan the index entries of a relation now.
However why is pg_index so large ?
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthias Urlichs | 2000-05-19 11:40:08 | Re: Performance (was: The New Slashdot Setup (includes MySql server)) |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-05-19 10:51:38 | RE: Performance (was: The New Slashdot Setup (includes MySql server)) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-05-19 11:28:17 | Re: Re: [SQL] Foreign keys breaks tables permissions |
| Previous Message | Karel Zak | 2000-05-19 11:08:24 | malloc() in Dllist |