Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE performance degradation (6.5.1)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE performance degradation (6.5.1)
Date: 1999-07-27 14:39:40
Message-ID: 7070.933086380@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
> Probably I found the problem. After running my test, whiich became
> very slow I looked at /usr/local/pgsql/data/base/discovery

> -rw------- 1 postgres users 5070848 Jul 27 16:14 hits
> -rw------- 1 postgres users 1409024 Jul 27 16:14 hits_pkey

> This is for table with one row after a lot of updates.
> Too much. vacuum analyze this table was a good medicine !

If the table contains only one row, why are you bothering with an
index on it?

> Is this a design problem ?

Only that space in tables and indexes can't be re-used until vacuum.
I'm not sure if there's any good way around that or not...

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 1999-07-27 14:47:34 i386 RPMs available for v6.5.1
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 1999-07-27 14:39:31 Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha