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

Re: Performance problems testing with Spamassassin 3.1.0 Bayes module.

From: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
To: "Matthew Schumacher" <matt(dot)s(at)aptalaska(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance problems testing with Spamassassin 3.1.0 Bayes module.
Date: 2005-07-28 12:20:35
Message-ID: 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3417DCF21@Herge.rcsinc.local (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
> I'm not sure how much this has been discussed on the list, but wasn't
> able to find anything relevant in the archives.
> 
> The new Spamassassin is due out pretty soon.  They are currently
testing
> 3.1.0pre4.  One of the things I hope to get out of this release is
bayes
> word stats moved to a real RDBMS.  They have separated the mysql
> BayesStore module from the PgSQL one so now postgres can use it's own
> queries.
> 
> I loaded all of this stuff up on a test server and am finding that the
> bayes put performance is really not good enough for any real amount of
> mail load.
> 
> The performance problems seems to be when the bayes module is
> inserting/updating.  This is now handled by the token_put procedure.

1. you need high performance client side timing (sub 1 millisecond).  on
win32 use QueryPerformanceCounter

2. one by one, convert queries inside your routine into dynamic
versions.  That is, use execute 'query string'

3. Identify the problem.  Something somewhere is not using the index.
Because of the way the planner works you have to do this sometimes.

Merlin

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2005-07-28 13:02:18
Subject: Re: Finding bottleneck
Previous:From: Claus GuttesenDate: 2005-07-28 11:52:03
Subject: Re: Finding bottleneck

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