Re: High activity short table and locks

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: Guillaume Bog <guibog(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: High activity short table and locks
Date: 2008-07-23 08:50:04
Message-ID: 4886F0BC.6050801@archonet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Guillaume Bog wrote:
> It seems I'm a bit stuck here. I'd appreciate some help. My main general
> question is "how to handle very small but hot status table that has to be
> updated every 30 seconds by 100 different persons, read and updated from
> many sides, and also joined with some more common tables (i.e. much larger
> but less hot)"

Remove all indexes except the one backing the primary-key. Run a VACUUM
FULL and REINDEX or CLUSTER the table. Vacuum *very frequently* -
you'll want custom values in pg_autovacuum. Add indexes back one at a
time to see what's really necessary. If you can keep the dead rows to a
reasonable level, I'd have thought you could get by without indexes.

You might want to consider setting synchronous_commit=off for updates to
the table. I'm assuming the information in the table isn't vital in the
event of a system crash, and that could reduce WAL activity if you're
limited by disk bandwidth.

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Emil Pedersen 2008-07-23 09:32:42 Re: inconsistent program behavior, fresh eyes needed
Previous Message Klint Gore 2008-07-23 08:08:47 Re: Substitute a variable in PL/PGSQL.