Andrew McMillan wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 16:13 -0800, Matthew Schumacher wrote:
>>Ok, I finally got some test data together so that others can test
>>without installing SA.
>>The schema and test dataset is over at
>>I have a pretty fast machine with a tuned postgres and it takes it about
>>2 minutes 30 seconds to load the test data. Since the test data is the
>>bayes information on 616 spam messages than comes out to be about 250ms
>>per message. While that is doable, it does add quite a bit of overhead
>>to the email system.
> On my laptop this takes:
> real 1m33.758s
> user 0m4.285s
> sys 0m1.181s
> One interesting effect is the data in bayes_vars has a huge number of
> updates and needs vacuum _frequently_. After the run a vacuum full
> compacts it down from 461 pages to 1 page.
I wonder why your laptop is so much faster. My 2 min 30 sec test was
done on a dual xeon with a LSI megaraid with 128MB cache and writeback
caching turned on.
Here are my memory settings:
shared_buffers = 16384
work_mem = 32768
maintenance_work_mem = 65536
I tried higher values before I came back to these but it didn't help my
performance any. I should also mention that this is a production
database server that was servicing other queries when I ran this test.
How often should this table be vacuumed, every 5 minutes?
Also, this test goes a bit faster with sync turned off, if mysql isn't
using sync that would be why it's so much faster. Anyone know what the
default for mysql is?
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2005-07-29 17:38:04|
|Subject: Re: Performance problems testing with Spamassassin 3.1.0|
|Previous:||From: Luke Lonergan||Date: 2005-07-29 17:13:41|
|Subject: Re: Performance problems testing with Spamassassin|