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

Re: Inserts or Updates

From: Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>
To: Ofer Israeli <oferi(at)checkpoint(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Olga Vingurt <olgavi(at)checkpoint(dot)com>, Netta Kabala <nettak(at)checkpoint(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Inserts or Updates
Date: 2012-02-07 14:47:22
Message-ID: 4F31397A.5090304@squeakycode.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On 2/7/2012 4:18 AM, Ofer Israeli wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are currently “stuck” with a performance bottleneck in our server
> using PG and we are thinking of two potential solutions which I would be
> happy to hear your opinion about.
>
> Our system has a couple of tables that hold client generated
> information. The clients communicate *every* minute with the server and
> thus we perform an update on these two tables every minute. We are
> talking about ~50K clients (and therefore records).
>
> These constant updates have made the table sizes to grow drastically and
> index bloating. So the two solutions that we are talking about are:
>

You dont give any table details, so I'll have to guess.  Maybe you have 
too many indexes on your table?  Or, you dont have a good primary index, 
which means your updates are changing the primary key?

If you only have a primary index, and you are not changing it, Pg should 
be able to do HOT updates.

If you have lots of indexes, you should review them, you probably don't 
need half of them.


And like Kevin said, try the simple one first.  Wont hurt anything, and 
if it works, great!

-Andy

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Igor NeymanDate: 2012-02-07 15:11:37
Subject: Re: Index with all necessary columns - Postgres vs MSSQL
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2012-02-07 12:27:33
Subject: Re: Inserts or Updates

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