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

Re: Why is restored database faster?

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: "david(at)shadovitz(dot)com" <david(at)shadovitz(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why is restored database faster?
Date: 2003-12-17 06:00:13
Message-ID: 87iskgugpe.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
David Shadovitz <david(at)shadovitz(dot)com> writes:
> What could account for this difference?

Lots of things -- disk fragmentation, expired tuples that aren't being
cleaned up by VACUUM due to a long-lived transaction, the state of the
kernel buffer cache, the configuration of the kernel, etc.

> How can I get the original server to perform as well as the new one?

Well, you can start by giving us some more information. For example,
what is the output of VACUUM VERBOSE on the slow server? How much disk
space does the database directory take up on both machines?

(BTW, "SELECT count(*) FROM table" isn't a particularly good DBMS
performance indication...)

-Neil


In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2003-12-17 06:31:06
Subject: Re: Why is restored database faster?
Previous:From: David ShadovitzDate: 2003-12-17 04:42:58
Subject: Why is restored database faster?

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