From: | Royce Ausburn <royce(at)inomial(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: CPU bound |
Date: | 2010-12-13 21:03:54 |
Message-ID: | 7F2CF023-C154-4F7F-9373-2470D4553096@inomial.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Thanks guys - interesting.
On 14/12/2010, at 5:59 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 12/12/10 6:43 PM, Royce Ausburn wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I notice that when restoring a DB on a laptop with an SDD, typically postgres is maxing out a CPU - even during a COPY. I wonder, what is postgres usually doing with the CPU? I would have thought the disk would usually be the bottleneck in the DB, but occasionally it's not. We're embarking on a new DB server project and it'd be helpful to understand where the CPU is likely to be the bottleneck.
>
> That's pretty normal; as soon as you get decent disk, especially
> something like an SSD with a RAM cache, you become CPU-bound. COPY does
> a LOT of parsing and data manipulation. Index building, of course, is
> almost pure CPU if you have a decent amount of RAM available.
>
> If you're restoring from a pg_dump file, and have several cores
> available, I suggest using parallel pg_restore.
>
>
> --
> -- Josh Berkus
> PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
> http://www.pgexperts.com
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-12-13 23:06:39 | Re: Tunning Postgres |
Previous Message | Benjamin Krajmalnik | 2010-12-13 20:45:10 | Re: Hardware recommendations |