Re: Very slow (2 tuples/second) sequential scan after bulk insert; speed returns to ~500 tuples/second after commit

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Pavan Deolasee
Тема Re: Very slow (2 tuples/second) sequential scan after bulk insert; speed returns to ~500 tuples/second after commit
Дата
Msg-id 2e78013d0803102324i66fa5376rca1bc3d250bc8317@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Very slow (2 tuples/second) sequential scan after bulk insert; speed returns to ~500 tuples/second after commit  ("Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki@enterprisedb.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> According
>  to oprofile, all the time is spent in TransactionIdIsInProgress. I think
>  it would be pretty straightforward to store the committed subtransaction
>  ids in a sorted array, instead of a linked list, and binary search.

Assuming that in most of the cases, there will be many committed and few aborted
subtransactions, how about storing the list of *aborted* subtransactions ?


Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB     http://www.enterprisedb.com

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Greg Smith
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: UPDATE 66k rows too slow
Следующее
От: Albert Cervera Areny
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: count * performance issue