Re: UPDATE slow

From: "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
Cc: John Smith <john_smith_45678(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: UPDATE slow
Date: 2003-02-05 01:03:15
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0302050100040.20150-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Stephan Szabo wrote:

>
> On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, John Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > > That works - updates on foo take about 1.4 seconds. I dropped all the
> > > > indexes and fk's on stats and updates there take about 2.8 seconds.
> > > > These are on the cygwin machine.
> > >
> > > The 2.8 seconds is on stats after dropping the fks and indexes? But
> > > it didn't help on the linux box?
>
>...
>
> Yeah, but I thought he'd said that on the linux box, even after dropping
> indexes and fks it was taking 5-10 seconds.

You miss remembered :)

>
> I'm also a bit confused because I'm not sure he's getting 2.8 seconds to
> update all the records or just a single record.

I'm pretty sure the command originally quoted was an unconstrained update
setting a constant value, i.e. all the rows. I had to change my test because
I'd setup unique indexes so couldn't do the constant value bit.

--
Nigel Andrews

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rudy Lippan 2003-02-05 01:39:34 Re: [INTERFACES] DBI driver and transactions
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2003-02-05 00:54:17 Re: UPDATE slow