Re: Very big insert/join performance problem (bacula)
| От | Devin Ben-Hur |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Very big insert/join performance problem (bacula) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4A5FA9DC.3020905@whitepages.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Very big insert/join performance problem (bacula) (Marc Cousin <cousinmarc@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-performance |
Marc Cousin wrote: > Le Thursday 16 July 2009 22:07:25, Kevin Grittner a écrit : >> Marc Cousin <cousinmarc@gmail.com> wrote: >>> the hot parts of these 2 tables are extremely likely to be in the >>> database or linux cache (buffer hit rate was 97% in the example >>> provided). Moreover, the first two queries of the insert procedure >>> fill the cache for us... > > Ok, so to sum it up, should I keep these values (I hate doing this :) ) ? > Would there be a way to approximately evaluate them regarding to the expected > buffer hit ratio of the query ? cached_buffer_cost = 0.01 effective_page_cost = ((1 - expected_cache_hit_ratio) * standard_page_cost) + (expected_cache_hit_ratio * cached_buffer_cost) If your assumption is only about these queries in particular, rather than applicable across the board, you should set the page_costs just for this query and reset them or close the connection after. -- -Devin
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: