Re: Really really slow select count(*)

From: felix <crucialfelix(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: sthomas(at)peak6(dot)com, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Really really slow select count(*)
Date: 2011-02-09 22:54:29
Message-ID: AANLkTimYDRWD2hu7O4C1nr2xU4CN3H18HnDMMJ5BZPMn@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)peak6(dot)com> wrote:

>
> With 300k rows, count(*) isn't a good test, really. That's just on the edge
> of big-enough that it could be > 1-second to fetch from the disk controller,
>

1 second you say ? excellent, sign me up

70 seconds is way out of bounds

I don't want a more efficient query to test with, I want the shitty query
that performs badly that isolates an obvious problem.

The default settings are not going to cut it for a database of your size,
> with the volume you say it's getting.
>

not to mention the map reduce jobs I'm hammering it with all night :)

but I did pause those until this is solved

But you need to put in those kernel parameters I suggested. And I know this
> sucks, but you also have to raise your shared_buffers and possibly your
> work_mem and then restart the DB. But this time, pg_ctl to invoke a fast
> stop, and then use the init script in /etc/init.d to restart it.

I'm getting another slicehost slice. hopefully I can clone the whole thing
over without doing a full install and go screw around with it there.

its a fairly complicated install, even with buildout doing most of the
configuration.

=felix

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gorshkov 2011-02-10 01:58:12 Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again...
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2011-02-09 19:40:08 Re: [PERFORM] pgbench to the MAXINT