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

Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 performance tuning questions

From: Rauan Maemirov <rauan(at)maemirov(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 performance tuning questions
Date: 2009-07-30 22:02:45
Message-ID: c78bcec0907301502t3aec056cj9abd4894a711f78@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Hey guyz, thanks for help. I solved the problems. The reason was in
bad query, that i've accidentally committed right after upgrading.
PostgreSQL 8.4 is perfect! Analyze works like a charm, and MUCH better
than in 8.3.

2009/7/31 Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> writes:
>>> Gzip does have some quirky performance behavior depending on the
>>> chunk size of data you stream into it.
>>
>> Can you enlarge on that comment?  I'm not sure that pg_dump is aware
>> that there's anything to worry about there.
>
> If the library used here is anything like the native library used by
> Java, it'd be worth putting a buffer layer ahead of the calls to gzip,
> so it isn't dealing with each individual value as a separate call.  I
> seem to remember running into that issue in Java, where throwing a
> BufferedOutputStream in there fixed the performance issue.
>
> -Kevin
>
> --
> 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
>

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Scott CareyDate: 2009-07-30 22:07:42
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 performance tuning questions
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2009-07-30 22:00:00
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 performance tuning questions

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