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

Re: Getting even more insert performance (250m+rows/day)

From: "Daniel J(dot) Luke" <dluke(at)geeklair(dot)net>
To: "Steinar H(dot) Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Getting even more insert performance (250m+rows/day)
Date: 2006-05-24 20:20:20
Message-ID: 6D9B6E0B-21C3-4F2F-88AD-D097069E0220@geeklair.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On May 24, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 04:09:54PM -0400, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>> no warnings in the log (I did change the checkpoint settings when I
>> set up the database, but didn't notice an appreciable difference in
>> insert performance).
>
> How about wal_buffers? Upping it might not help all that much if  
> only one
> thread is writing, but you might give it a try...

I tried, but I didn't notice a difference.

I should probably emphasize that I appear to be CPU bound (and I can  
double my # of rows inserted per second by removing the index on the  
table, or half it by adding another index).

I really should run gprof just to verify.

--
Daniel J. Luke
+========================================================+
| *---------------- dluke(at)geeklair(dot)net ----------------* |
| *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* |
+========================================================+
|   Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily   |
|          reflect the opinions of my employer.          |
+========================================================+


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Larry RosenmanDate: 2006-05-24 20:24:20
Subject: Re: Getting even more insert performance (250m+rows/day)
Previous:From: Mark LewisDate: 2006-05-24 20:18:32
Subject: Re: Getting even more insert performance (250m+rows/day)

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