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

Cleanup query takes along time

From: Rob Fielding <rob(at)dsvr(dot)net>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Cleanup query takes along time
Date: 2004-03-30 12:54:36
Message-ID: 40696E0C.9000303@dsvr.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Hi,

Can someone provide some insight for me as to why this query takes so 
long on 6655 rows of data. I'm beginning to think something is seriously 
wrong with my config wrt to memory settings. I note vmstats (at the 
bottom) indicates no swapping so I'm not running out system wide but I 
don't know whether I am within postgres.

sql> explain ANALYZE SELECT MIN(ref), h_message_id, COUNT(h_message_id) 
FROM mail_969 GROUP BY h_message_id HAVING COUNT(h_message_id) > 25;

Aggregate  (cost=85031.01..87894.10 rows=28631 width=44) (actual 
time=185449.57..185449.57 rows=0 loops=1)
   ->  Group  (cost=85031.01..85746.78 rows=286309 width=44) (actual 
time=185374.92..185413.32 rows=6655 loops=1)
         ->  Sort  (cost=85031.01..85031.01 rows=286309 width=44) 
(actual time=185374.91..185379.23 rows=6655 loops=1)
               ->  Seq Scan on mail_969  (cost=0.00..59081.09 
rows=286309 width=44) (actual time=179.65..185228.19 rows=6655 loops=1)
Total runtime: 185451.08 msec

To put this into perspective, we see similar results on a table with 
over 300,000 rows :

sql>  explain ANALYZE SELECT MIN(ref), h_message_id, COUNT(h_message_id) 
FROM mail_650 GROUP BY h_message_id HAVING COUNT(h_message_id) > 25;
NOTICE:  QUERY PLAN:

Aggregate  (cost=88503.85..91596.83 rows=30930 width=48) (actual 
time=142483.52..149102.57 rows=244 loops=1)
   ->  Group  (cost=88503.85..89277.10 rows=309298 width=48) (actual 
time=142444.19..148477.99 rows=309245 loops=1)
         ->  Sort  (cost=88503.85..88503.85 rows=309298 width=48) 
(actual time=142444.17..142652.83 rows=309245 loops=1)
               ->  Seq Scan on mail_650  (cost=0.00..60297.98 
rows=309298 width=48) (actual time=445.75..105818.97 rows=309245 loops=1)
Total runtime: 149181.30 msec

These selects are part of a cleanup operation on a 70GB DB (normal 
conditions are around 25GB). They find dupes, preserve one primary key, 
and delete the rest. Currently I have an issue that the DB requires a 
full vacuum from prior runs of the above however this is another 
problem, detailed on the 'admin' list.

Perhaps this is due to the dataset still being so big (70GB) on 
effectively one disk, but I just thought I'd check with you guys.

Hardware:

1GB Ram, SMP 1GHz P3, SvrWks OSB4 chipset, Adaptec aic7899  with 2 
SCSI-160 disks split between DB and pg_xlog. (I know disks should be 
better laid out for a busy db, but this hasn't been my decision :)

Config:

max_fsm_relations = 1000
max_fsm_pages = 20000
vacuum_mem = 65536
effective_cache_size = 95694
random_page_cost = 2
sort_mem=65536
max_connections = 128
shared_buffers = 15732
wal_buffers = 64 # need to determin
wal_files = 64 # range 0-64
wal_sync_method = fsync   # the default varies across platforms:
wal_debug = 0             # range 0-16


# hopefully this should see less LogFlushes per LogInsert - use more WAL 
though.
commit_delay = 10000     # range 0-100000
commit_siblings = 2       # range 1-1000


checkpoint_segments = 32  # in logfile segments (16MB each), min 1
checkpoint_timeout = 600  # in seconds, range 30-3600
fsync = false
#fsync = true


vmstats whilst running (indicating no swaping) :

    procs                      memory    swap          io     system 
      cpu
  r  b  w   swpd   free   buff  cache  si  so    bi    bo   in    cs  us 
  sy  id
  1  2  1  45592  10868  11028 853700   0   0     7     3    1     0   5 
   5   7
  2  2  0  45592  10288  11236 849312   8   0   732   888 1980  3516  63 
  12  26
  8  2  0  45592  11208  11304 849224   0   0  4438   286 2696  3758  66 
  15  19
10  2  3  45592  10284  11332 848872   0   0  6344   664 2888  3614  71 
  18  11
  2  8  1  45592  10408  11388 845140   0   0  4622   402 2216  2306  70 
  11  19
  3  7  2  45592  10416  11440 845972   0   0  3538    68 2052  2079  66 
   9  25
10  5  1  45592  10916  11496 846676   0   0  4428   444 2968  4385  75 
  17   8
  2  4  0  45592  10380  11592 848348   0   0  5940   184 2609  3421  69 
  15  16

Cheers,

-- 

Rob Fielding
rob(at)dsvr(dot)net

www.dsvr.co.uk              Development             Designer Servers Ltd

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2004-03-30 14:20:27
Subject: Re: column size too large, is this a bug?
Previous:From: Richard HuxtonDate: 2004-03-30 08:22:42
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Raw vs Filesystem

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