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

Re: Performance of CLUSTER

From: Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com>
To: Mark Thornton <mthornton(at)optrak(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance of CLUSTER
Date: 2012-06-11 13:42:52
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On 06/10/2012 03:20 AM, Mark Thornton wrote:

> 4. 3980922 rows, 1167MB, 276s
> 5. 31843368 rows, 9709MB, ~ 10 hours

Just judging based on the difference between these two, it would appear 
to be from a lot of temp space thrashing. An order of magnitude more 
rows shouldn't take over 100x longer to cluster, even with GIST. What's 
your maintenance_work_mem setting?

Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604


See for terms and conditions related to this email

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Fitch, BrittDate: 2012-06-11 13:55:29
Subject: postgres clustering interactions with pg_dump
Previous:From: Rural HunterDate: 2012-06-11 12:55:14
Subject: Re: how to change the index chosen in plan?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group