| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: problem with large maintenance_work_mem settings and |
| Date: | 2006-03-08 16:41:34 |
| Message-ID: | 1141836094.27729.753.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 10:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> > CREATE INDEX on a 1,8B row table (5 int columns - index created on the
> > first row about 300M distinct values):
>
> > before: 11h 51min
> > after: 3h 11min(!)
>
> Cool. Does it seem to be I/O bound now? Would you be willing to do it
> over with oprofile turned on?
Very.
Any chance of trying it with different maintenance_work_mem settings?
Did you try this with trace_sort=on? If so could we get the logs for
that?
[Results welcome from other hackers...particularly with regard to
queries with sort steps in rather than CREATE INDEX.]
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2006-03-08 17:03:07 | Re: Add switches for DELIMITER and NULL in pg_dump COPY |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-03-08 16:35:04 | Re: Merge algorithms for large numbers of "tapes" |