Re: Deleting bytea, autovacuum, and 8.2/8.4 differences

From: VJK <vjkmail(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Deleting bytea, autovacuum, and 8.2/8.4 differences
Date: 2010-03-15 16:37:57
Message-ID: 600ad6df1003150937t68b6c1d4k976fb5504e448f3c@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > VJK wrote:
> >> Since Pg does not use the concept of rollback segments, it is unclear
> >> why deletion produces so much disk IO (4GB).
>
> For an example like this one, you have to keep in mind that the
> toast-table rows for the large bytea value have to be marked deleted,
> too. Also, since I/O happens in units of pages, the I/O volume to
> delete a tuple is just as much as the I/O to create it.
>

That makes sense.

> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Carey 2010-03-15 17:58:16 Re: shared_buffers advice
Previous Message Matthew Wakeling 2010-03-15 15:58:51 Re: GiST index performance