Re: can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs

From: "Anjan Dave" <adave(at)vantage(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Matt Clark" <matt(at)ymogen(dot)net>, "Rod Taylor" <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, "Postgresql Performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs
Date: 2004-10-26 22:45:37
Message-ID: 4BAFBB6B9CC46F41B2AD7D9F4BBAF7850985E1@vt-pe2550-001.vantage.vantage.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Ok, i was thinking from the disk perspective. Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Tue 10/26/2004 6:37 PM
To: Anjan Dave
Cc: Matt Clark; Rod Taylor; Postgresql Performance
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs

"Anjan Dave" <adave(at)vantage(dot)com> writes:
> One thing I am not sure is why 'bi' (disk writes) stays at 0 mostly,
> it's the 'bo' column that shows high numbers (reads from disk). With so
> many INSERT/UPDATEs, I would expect it the other way around...

Er ... it *is* the other way around. bi is blocks in (to the CPU),
bo is blocks out (from the CPU).

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Curtis Zinzilieta 2004-10-26 23:04:35 Re: can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-10-26 22:37:32 Re: can't handle large number of INSERT/UPDATEs