Re: Performance suggestions?

From: Paul Tillotson <pntil(at)shentel(dot)net>
To: "Harvey, Allan AC" <HarveyA(at)OneSteel(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance suggestions?
Date: 2004-12-16 00:54:57
Message-ID: 41C0DCE1.7090103@shentel.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Allan,

Postgres is probably not the ideal solution to this problem. If you'd
like to try this though, two points:

- If the table really only has 20 rows, drop the index. If the table
really only has 20 active rows at a
time, then the planner will never use that index.
(run EXPLAIN on your query to see if it is using your index. If not, it
is only slowing you down.)

- As said before, VACUUM frequently, maybe even every 10 seconds
(experiment with different intervals.)

Paul Tillotson

>I have a small table about 20 rows, a constant, that is receiving
>about 160 updates per second.
>The table is used to share gathered data to other process asynchronously.
>After 5 min it is 12 updates per second.
>Performance returns after a vacuum analyse.
>
>I'm using 7.4.5.
>This is the table structure
> Table "public.lastscan"
> Column | Type | Modifiers
>-----------+-----------------------------+-----------
> pointnum | integer | not null
> parameter | character varying(8) | not null
> value | double precision | not null
> dt | timestamp without time zone | not null
>Indexes:
> "lsindex" btree (pointnum, parameter)
>
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Rylander 2004-12-16 01:52:34 Re: WAL/pg_xlog on Another Disk: Redundancy?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2004-12-16 00:26:49 Re: Can a database notify all clients when something changes?