On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The best bet is to issue an "analyze table" (with your table name in
> there, of course) and see if that helps. Quite often the real issue
> is that pgsql is using a method to insert rows when you have 10million
> of them that made perfect sense when you had 100 rows, but no longer
> is the best way.
This has caused the behavior to be... erratic. That is, individual
copies are now taking anywhere from 2 seconds (great!) to 30+ seconds
(back where we were before). I also clearly can't ANALYZE the table
after every 4k batch; even if that resulted in 2 second copies, the
analyze would take up as much time as the copy otherwise would have
been. I could conceivably analyze after every ~80k (the next larger
unit of batching; I'd love to be able to batch the copies at that
level but dependencies ensure that I can't), but it seems odd to have
to analyze so often.
Oh, barring COPY delays I'm generating the data at a rate of something
like a half million rows every few minutes, if that's relevant.
- David T. Wilson
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2008-04-22 21:04:00|
|Subject: Re: Rapidly decaying performance repopulating a large table|
|Previous:||From: Erik Jones||Date: 2008-04-22 20:53:12|
|Subject: Re: Schema migration tools?|