On 10.4.2012 00:37, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> wrote:
>> If you have slower drives, the dependency is about linear (half the
>> speed -> twice the time). So either your drives are very slow, or
>> there's something rotten.
>> I still haven's seen iostat / vmstat output ... that'd tell us much more
>> about the causes.
> geometry column can potentially quite wide. one thing we need to see
> is the table has any indexes -- in particular gist/gin on the
Yeah, but in one of the previous posts the OP posted this:
relname | relpages | reltuples
poi_all_new | 2421133 | 6.53328e+06
which means the table has ~ 19GB for 6.5 million rows, so it's like
2.8GB per 1 million of rows, i.e. ~3kB per row. I've been working with 1
million rows and 1.3GB of data, so it's like 50% of the expected amount.
But this does not explain why the SELECT COUNT(*) takes 364 seconds on
that machine. That'd mean ~8MB/s.
Regarding the indexes, the the OP already posted a description of the
table and apparently there are these indexes:
"poi_all_new_pk" PRIMARY KEY, btree (ogc_fid)
"poi_all_new_flname_idx" btree (flname)
"poi_all_new_geom_idx" btree (wkb_geometry)
"poi_all_new_ogc_fid_idx" btree (ogc_fid)
"poi_all_new_pinyin_idx" btree (pinyin)
So none of them is GIN/GIST although some one of them is on the geometry
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Jeff Janes||Date: 2012-04-10 02:59:00|
|Subject: Re: Planner selects slow "Bitmap Heap Scan" when "Index
Scan" is faster|
|Previous:||From: Merlin Moncure||Date: 2012-04-09 22:37:54|
|Subject: Re: about multiprocessingmassdata|