Re: Sustained inserts per sec ... ?
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sustained inserts per sec ... ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1112648303.16721.816.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sustained inserts per sec ... ? (Christopher Petrilli <petrilli@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Sustained inserts per sec ... ?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 16:18 -0400, Christopher Petrilli wrote: > On Apr 4, 2005 4:11 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > > I'm very interested in the graphs of elapsed time for COPY 500 rows > > > > against rows inserted. The simplistic inference from those graphs are > > > > that if you only inserted 5 million rows into each table, rather than 10 > > > > million rows then everything would be much quicker. I hope this doesn't > > > > work, but could you try that to see if it works? I'd like to rule out a > > > > function of "number of rows" as an issue, or focus in on it depending > > > > upon the results. > > > > Any chance of running a multiple load of 4 million rows per table, > > leaving the test running for at least 3 tables worth (12+ M rows)? > > As soon as I get done running a test without indexes :-) > > > > > Q: Please can you confirm that the discontinuity on the graph at around > > > > 5000 elapsed seconds matches EXACTLY with the switch from one table to > > > > another? That is an important point. > > > > > > Well, the change over happens at 51593.395205 seconds :-) Here's two > > > lines from the results with row count and time added: > > > > > > 10000000 51584.9818912 8.41331386566 > > > 10000500 51593.395205 0.416964054108 > > > > My program *SPECIFICALLY* counts to 10M then switches the COPY statement. > > OK. Please... > > cd $PGDATA/base/26488263 > > ls -l > > [root@bigbird base]# cd 26488263/ > [root@bigbird 26488263]# ls -l > total 2003740 > -rw------- 1 pgsql pgsql 1073741824 Apr 4 15:07 26488271 > -rw------- 1 pgsql pgsql 407527424 Apr 4 16:17 26488271.1 Can you do: select relname from pg_class where relfilenode = 26488271 and confirm that the name is the table you've been loading... Couldn't see all your indexes... are they still there? Thanks, Best Regards, Simon Riggs
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: